[netconf] Should Partial Lock be deprecated?
Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Mon, 31 May 2021 16:59 UTC
Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D1073A1EAF for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 May 2021 09:59:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 xKBUwAHcPOSw for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 May 2021 09:59:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com (mail-lj1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F9B43A1EAE for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 May 2021 09:59:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id v5so15739950ljg.12 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 May 2021 09:59:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=4E20jta/PnxXjBz2oBP8GbtShpkqbuQ+Cc2TTx9bK10=; b=nba1fUov0aMdDm9CIYgsEkGPVsftTO4HXyltJiu2zlnWS7ASaUmAxbxprn4EsrbJ9r lET4TaBAUKLXTC5NH2YBA3Skt+bpx7DizJz5Q2w6DKSTwGGtBVlKwsEHkV2YuEVkVDs1 iCbZZ12/ywGQTvWGR+ipIoe7KK8irVJ3v+CJCDm3MvI8scc4s3InbuhYgDU7PWMdMJ2i higYYKnn9B0Vem6p9T25TGMSM9qr5idyOIyNcKeU7DD4jsSnjvQTjDCtXbKm0TGXENpl p7wx/OsdpFnW5myv6md10kTH0TcdWV3qmL/dZkOL/cSUQvqrp6kImE9FFbploiNGsxjw b1zg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=4E20jta/PnxXjBz2oBP8GbtShpkqbuQ+Cc2TTx9bK10=; b=GpKEnGebs2ZYW7008+FIIZfp35IZlYOk1juYAxLpH1iL6zmMvedPhxrGiRYZSVnmpy D1w4jrn9TFUNxdZ5+3G0mVXSzGJ0YZm6/dJ/Ia6rW6KJmBgUG+1x9Kud63Mt0phivsME suHm6VFNQB/0dj2rYUrWxKHohxKFnooB4agOW9kmovLPcsSDYB9DttpiuX9a7fo7vj8F /KvqHdTZG/D9+rbVgDvdJZA11xFJrd5MqMtVO5f28hNTqamo7EikYpVVPvxD80enxo6P YhIYMkH1+4uLBkMjW9BjKTPSf5UhsxQIkd7F5V4xajHy7tr3FlgJSNzJzajcK6+SHv7M 5epg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532jiA7pHV6JAXWJf4CjI1zdhAWJwpHjBoRDIKLf0oU/7csEre8r dMN8j6yF2jqZnfmT6ohnyM0wMPL41TvOaEojjBAvIdR7piSovHos
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx25XpXmcK0WVzAZ3+r9koFhWf8gXgAlRmUG/5yL80meeja+kIz14rjxu0S033+ekJg9lHwxJyzSo1sQy2gcrg=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:89ce:: with SMTP id c14mr18001492ljk.91.1622480343362; Mon, 31 May 2021 09:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 09:58:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHS+fC1BE3kGopFhbxppo_5+uMbB6pi3NavxWzmZK+pWUg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000085855405c3a32437"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/-tLMXkudbOA5OecAqv3LtehwUKQ>
Subject: [netconf] Should Partial Lock be deprecated?
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 16:59:12 -0000
Hi, I bet some do not remember we have this RFC https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5717 (So old there is a normative XSD and non-normative YANG module). I have not seen this RFC used in several years. Is anyone using it? Should it be deprecated? Just curious. Andy
- [netconf] Should Partial Lock be deprecated? Andy Bierman
- Re: [netconf] Should Partial Lock be deprecated? Kent Watsen
- Re: [netconf] Should Partial Lock be deprecated? Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)
- Re: [netconf] Should Partial Lock be deprecated? Per Andersson (perander)