> - Objects (switches, ports, routes, BGP neighbors, etc).
> - Relationships between these objects.
Just remember that many things that may seem "relationship" are
often object, depending on what your reasoning is. A CAT5 4 twisted
pair wire running between two of your switches is often an object in
many systems, not a relationship. (Maybe obvious, but I thought I'd
mention it).
> "configuration"). This last point has been largely covered with the
> exception of some of the particulars of rollback.
If the last points have been largely covered, but some of the
particulars of rollback haven't, then the last points haven't really
been covered. Rollback ought to be crystal clear given the last
points, and if it isn't, something is missing. Tell me what you see
as unclear in rollback.
> I'm fairly clear on an approach for the bits other than the low level
> model to create network services out of individual devices and their
> connections. I think an ER type of approach would be general enough
> to solve the problem. What material should I be reading to get a
> better handle on this? :-)
Dunno. One thing I remember from a cube mate several jobs ago was
that he was having a lot of trouble with the fact that naive network
questions can require huge self-joins (what't the diameter of your
network when you count all the managaged objects?), but I suspect a
lot of those problems can be solved with some cleverness: you can
build a one way join of some sort (pre-computing a layer 3 world, for
instance) to avoid having to join twenty things to get to how
192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2 are related across a complex point to
point link with up and down muxing along the way.
References:
|
|
