[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: partial locking



Hello,
As Dan has pointed out there are a big number of protocols/interfaces that can modify device data. As I understand this device data will have an internal addressing/naming scheme that is mapped to the addressing schemes of the different protocols. It is the responsibility of the device to do this mapping. This mapping has to be done for partial locking as well, to map the area to be locked. However this internal mapping (easy or difficult) is completely device dependent, and I fail to see why IETF should try to standardize it.

The same mapping is needed for the base Netconf anyway.

If parts of the device data is not visible via Netconf that might be a good or bad thing, but does not really effect Netconf locking. Netconf can only lock what it sees.

Balazs

Eliot Lear wrote:
Andy Bierman wrote:
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.

This is going to be highly implementation dependent. And it truly is academic as relates to SNMP if READ-WRITE is not enabled for configuration objects that NETCONF covers.

--
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/>

--
Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
TSP System Manager
ECN: 831 7320                        Fax: +36 1 4377792
Tel: +36-1-437-7320     email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com

--
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/>