18 Nov
2021
18 Nov
'21
5:29 p.m.
On 18/11/21 16:11, Robert Armstrong wrote:
My plans don't have me caring at all about what (if any) NCP interface
there is. I'd want to use an HTTP/TCP API. Actually, my API needs could
be handled by a completely separate process or just an extra endpoint
bolted onto pydecnet's API without actually tying into what's currently
going on with the API.
Brian
Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
The only thing I'd really do is create/update/delete circuits ..
The thing
is, I'm assuming that any such changes via NCP would only be temporary. Unless Paul
implements a way for pyDECnet to rewrite it's own config file, then the next time you
reboot or restart any changes would be lost. Is that what you're expecting? That
pretty much kills any utility in this feature for me. Also, I really like the ability to put comments in
the config file. I have lots of circuits and I have to keep notes to remember what's
what, and that ability to add comments would be lost with an "on the fly"
circuit definition.
The way I envision this I would create a directory specific to my
agent's use case. I wouldn't ever expect the "main" configs to ever be
overwritten.
So let's say you put everything in /etc/pydecnet. I would put all my
dynamically generated configs into /etc/pydecnet/managed and then you
would just start it all as pydecnet router.conf html.conf managed/*.conf
or something similar. Mostly just thinking out loud here.
-brian