Re: interesting application problems

[Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>]

>>>>> On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:34:31 -0500, "Frye, Robert J (US SSA)" <robert.frye@baesystems.com> said:

Robert> I think the key PDU of your sequences below is the "<commit>".
Robert> There are some operations (eg "Change IP addr") that
Robert> can't/shouldn't be done on a live interface, particularly the
Robert> one carrying the management traffic.

One of the dreams with netconf, I think, is that you'll be able to
change everything right?  That's one of the whole points: final an
interface other than CLI that will expose everything.  (Realistically,
we'll have to wait and see if this actually happens).

If you can't change the address on the management interface, then you
won't achieve this goal.

However, it's not just limited to addresses.  Masks, router addresses,
...  There is a list of things that could cause the same problem.
Certainly more than I can enumerate.

I don't think you can solve the issue.  I agree you simply need to be
careful.  I was merely bringing up the topic so the real netconf
experts could file it in the back of their head.  It might warrant
text, I don't know.  That's why we have authors ;-)

Robert> If the <commit> is done separately (and possibly using UDP? 
Robert> Needs more thought), and if the running config changes don't
Robert> become effective until <commit>, then I don't think you can
Robert> shoot yourself in the foot as easily. 

I agree it might be wise to separate out such things into separate
change sets.

(UDP isn't possible with netconf by design, so that isn't a solution.
The document requires a stream based protocol.)

-- 
"In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap,
 and much more difficult to find."  -- Terry Pratchett

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>