Subject: [netmod] System management YANG model

From: "Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 10:09:01 +0000

Hi,

When looking at the system time management part of this model I notice that
for ntp only a config true section is foreseen.  But assume that we learn at
run-time the NTP server (e.g. using DHCP), there is no config false data
part to reflect what has been learned dynamically.  Storing this in the
config true part does not seem to be correct to me since this might get lost
because of a copy-config action (in case a NC client never configured
something there).  Are we not missing a server-list in the state data?

Best regards - Vriendelijke groeten,

Bart Bogaert

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 12:45:02 +0200

> something there).  Are we not missing a server-list in the state data?

Yes, but the good news is that the revised datastore architecture
solves this issue without requiring any changes to the model. ;-)

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

---

From: "Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 10:49:34 +0000

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 10:09:01AM +0000, Bogaert, Bart (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> When looking at the system time management part of this model I notice 
> that for ntp only a config true section is foreseen.  But assume that 
> we learn at run-time the NTP server (e.g. using DHCP), there is no 
> config false data part to reflect what has been learned dynamically.  
> Storing this in the config true part does not seem to be correct to me 
> since this might get lost because of a copy-config action (in case a 
> NC client never configured something there).  Are we not missing a
server-list in the state data?

Yes, but the good news is that the revised datastore architecture solves
this issue without requiring any changes to the model. ;-)
[Bart Bogaert] Ok, but there is no NC server implementing this yet so this
means that everybody needs to solve it in their way if this is needed now?
Doesn't this raise an interop issue if different approaches are taken?

Regards, Bart

/js

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 13:25:07 +0200

> Doesn't this raise an interop issue if different approaches are taken?

There is not standard yet to report an NTP server learned say via
DHCP.  Reporting a dynamically learned NTP server is simply not part
of the system model - so yes you can't expect interoperability for this.

I doubt that the system model will be changed to add a specific state
object for this given the direction we are moving to.

/js