Re: [netmod] Wrapping up system-creatable

[Kent Watsen <kwatsen at juniper.net>]

In preference order: 1, 4, 2

As mentioned before, I will submit an ID shortly for a more holistic approach for this...

Thanks,
Kent



> -----Original Message-----
> From: netmod-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:netmod-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of David Partain
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 9:57 AM
> To: netmod at ietf.org
> Subject: [netmod] Wrapping up system-creatable
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The various documents have been updated in advance of the upcoming IETF,
> and,
> unless I'm mistaken, we seem to have one sticky issue left to clear up,
> and
> that is what to do about system-creatable.
> 
> Last week, Martin published a set of possible choices of what we could do.
> 
> It would be helpful if everyone who cares would reply to this message
> telling
> me / the group what you think the right answer is.
> 
> The choices are below.  If you think there are other possible choices,
> please
> say so.  I've renumbered just to try to make it clearer what you're
> "voting"
> for.
> 
> 1. Do nothing in the draft and let implementations and data models figure
> out
> how/if/when/why the server can modify the configuration data.
> 
> 2. Do nothing but write in the document that we _know_ it's an issue but
> we're
> still not doing anything.
> 
> 3. Add text that says that the server MUST NOT modify config data unless
> dictated by the data model (through description clauses or future
> extensions).
> 
> 4. Add text that says that the server is free to modify config data in any
> way
> it wants, unless constrained by the data model (through description
> clauses
> or future extensions).
> 
> 5.  Add formal statements (e.g. the current s-c) to control how the server
> can
> modfiy config.
> 
> Please let your voice be heard as soon as possible.  Please try to choose
> one...
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> David
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod