Re: interesting application problems

["Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>]

Hi -

> From: "Rob Enns" <rpe@juniper.net>
> To: "Wes Hardaker" <wjhns1@hardakers.net>; <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 10:17 AM
> Subject: RE: interesting application problems
...
> To address this, I can add the following to the description
> of commit:
>
> The &lt;commit&gt; operation must execute atomically. If the
> device is unable to commit all of the changes in the candidate
> configuration datastore, then the running configuration must
> remain unchanged.
...

The first sentence of the proposed text would impose much
stricter limitations on implementations than would the second.
If we're going to throw around words like "atomically", then we
should qualify them so that they do not over-constrain implementations,
especially in hard real-time environments.  I see us heading down
the slippery slope of "as if simultaneously", which was cited as
one of the implementors' objections to the SNMP way of doing
things.

Randy



--
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/>