Re: partial locking

[Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>]

Eliot Lear wrote:
> Should NETCONF impose a write-lock on the data then it shouldn't be 
> writable to other applications, be that SNMP, or for that matter the 
> CLI.  An error should be returned.  In other words, the lock interface 
> needs to be below the external protocol interface.  This can prove 
> Challenging in some implementations, but it's still the right thing to 
> do.  I'm a little leery (perhaps evena  little LEARy) about attempting 
> to codify coherency of this form within the IETF, but I could be 
> convinced.  Customers, on the other hand, can codify anything they want 
> in their RFPs...

Partial locking in NETCONF is a performance optimization.
I suppose if an agent implementation contained data that was
written frequently by non-NETCONF sources then it might be
worthwhile to implement partial locking for those sources.

IMO, this is an academic exercise.  I am not convinced that
SNMP has any meaningful role to play in writing NETCONF
configuration databases, let alone one that requires
performance optimizations such as partial locking.

Andy

--
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/>