IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-06

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 26 September 2018 21:25 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5270712F1A2; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 14:25:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=VZbORg4E; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=tA7G3WHq
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6ciBpovb4dmv; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 14:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC22612F1AB; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 14:25:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93DBB21F1A; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:25:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:25:30 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=ZaLjK0w5FTb2aMrw1FsdzyTiYnUkg pVQ9eb1vlcTBBs=; b=VZbORg4EVx7aiNd64dDTSDJ9pPwTvagvVOR61g6Z5hMiU 4PGnJCkatOZba5bzqJTmfBZ8bb8aYql98XcmVW3SmvaK9ptWfI8bxYpXf2EDyg8k nKC3D9qUd0gLOg+qrGMIKlKYKKhTGH6WxwOWnNnkadWa/qQR6sux1JaYmj9lQ/IL xt4h66uB6544mI53HBElNFLpGWLJFbIdh5Yv2KcemurTJ/9RyWygY09MK9ApO39n K5JYEAal1zWLeuqG1Da7dh+gvxvtokBjBMiA0CGXn3GT1JXYdMt9/ca8zFJQs1EG WuRquddWQ2AfaICsZT7srjosxA228lIQwgUeLBZhA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=ZaLjK0 w5FTb2aMrw1FsdzyTiYnUkgpVQ9eb1vlcTBBs=; b=tA7G3WHqpyfNkcad5nCYUV XnJjzsRI5MgjSrs3pRwjgQgYKAR9beq3OdJdY+T7/9l4HXVM+DohkxiBxT9IBfMO 8jefhFP/dSJjxuipEaj5t9e8p+55mUtFIe9TMxQ3/qoK79ixKlYts7fupmj7iWNG fISE3tyKuzBhpRJQZkrQRf8jNsKLycCQlbczGODZ/LWT+n2tuMriiqkZKy+qJ8LY PO67J15GKakdFopVgbK066HgviVSg2YKar08FDkWsQRPoRvZI5FnGHui6BLDzA1a gonUx5qsAYY/LHt1BCEYYqncRIRu8ZZ7u3YnqrhAYWT0JLj74DbGwSapnon7y95Q ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:SvmrW6_QeDNM_-TIbgQrG7kdYz4UyK24F92WQ-yYmzpgVkQRxhHHQQ> <xmx:SvmrWxO0r_6cDcfW_nvKC3pIVtQoHH8TDenTSQEWMl0Mu2TeVTYVSg> <xmx:SvmrW-DIBmHL9-7Z9DMLm-0rM7k9PGlL2BOhoq2-3IuLis0beA0uNA> <xmx:SvmrW1MTh-Si-MUcxRfU8RQbPcHC57kutde5VZQkZDmPi_Zys9tsOg> <xmx:SvmrW1evUe2Wy19WpQArjpMSMPCKgnygslSz4xbRMhUMs7rmxiPz6w> <xmx:SvmrWzkb9yjwmcH50jGPVKvFPPENy5iwQfbcU0flKgCSj4IRHegVVw>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:SvmrWwn8bFRU5C8MQX8tugXLN9LOcMRBZscCAsYlBjCuo8ZkeBF6mA>
Received: from [10.154.183.69] (unknown [128.107.241.173]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C66B1E44DF; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:25:29 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <20180716105513.5457wkuu4cb6gtdd@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 14:25:28 -0700
Cc: gen-art <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf.all@ietf.org, netconf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0047A04B-A30D-464F-BFD3-545806F486AB@cooperw.in>
References: <153122128332.25153.10473559847025784058@ietfa.amsl.com> <20180716105513.5457wkuu4cb6gtdd@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/LTH8nKQTUJYEb2R0WOuhvPDqyFw>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-06
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 21:25:36 -0000

Christer, thanks for your review. I have flagged your first comment in my No Objection ballot since it seems like a good point to clarify.

Alissa

> On Jul 16, 2018, at 6:55 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 04:14:43AM -0700, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>> 
>> Minor issues:
>> 
>> Sometimes, when a draft updates an existing RFC, people ask whether
>> implementations not implementing the draft are still compliant with the updated
>> RFC. Based on discussions, the consensus seems to be that existing
>> implementations are still compliant, and if one wants to mandate the new
>> features a bis is needed. I would just like to confirm whether that applies
>> also to this draft. If so, perhaps a note indicating that would be useful, in
>> order to avoid discussions in future?
> 
> An existing NETCONF server not implementing NMDA is still compliant to
> the RFC 6241. However, a NETCONF server implementing NMDA (RFC 8342)
> has to implement this update to RFC 6241. Do you want to have this
> stated more explicitly? (We will have the same for RESTCONF and the
> NMDA update of RESTCONF.)
> 
>> Related to that, it would also be good to have an interoperability
>> statement, saying that implementations that implement the draft will
>> still work with implementations that do not.
> 
> This primarily concerns clients: They need to be able to fallback to
> using <edit-config> instead of <edit-data> and <get> instead of
> <get-data> if they communicate with a non NMDA NETCONF server. I am
> not sure whether this is a "SHOULD be able to fallback" or a "MUST be
> able to fallback".
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email