IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netconf] Adoption-suitability for draft-unyte-netconf-distributed-notif

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Mon, 10 August 2020 19:38 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 647843A0C64 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:38:57 -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 WoleslZ3rDYj for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) (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 571F93A0C5B for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id w14so10920394ljj.4 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lbW8fVwfrHZ2GH5HU4vUwfyqQcVqq4UOuPLUJPl631c=; b=UIjtv4fXuKUM0H4WJpr5fActpaxn7Pygn8FHVFAKlMr2nfmGwx18Hoa8s2BqHy8UKn yKZg5XssYpMfCWMEopwvFgyh2kM9BZPCCdv3mJmgJwboPIB8pSwpfJJYemoNzvWhYblI 3bAZ7/KGDLAfquoNxEJgKdeotqXT8RvA0YjxZKpWnoPzKEotR+xT6r7SvecbiD49Sqlr j8UYhBcTK5tCCW0+tKZ0TSYxqfDxT82E7RMGjU3A8Z8wpwvDo+W9qcGhT8ivUQLV0hEc 5aOSZQrk42biEsxgEPL6AggLb5VFP6uT/CCS7Y8YXGolDA/v1LjfHgNuAPUuSkWeRGuh qExw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lbW8fVwfrHZ2GH5HU4vUwfyqQcVqq4UOuPLUJPl631c=; b=doPg/mEt+vPoB3RW71Ml8y8vdVlwIYve1FtD8GpOU5DUR8hMd1v0qTAFklINizZhd1 NoVeVWTFt85CcqWhBD5dkSN/UTNbA3ivKiC28FI1B+j+8ScXDU24RKQkJ9AtglCS/S42 NrYkkkPMjh6YuOjXMPkHQdWG38ejquNgRtk9XGQjRe4tMK/ggvwUcAqRmwq+m7nzxDvI J/x8T3EaabGDaiuc5oy4w7/60kQDrncYyzKS/uOXPfoM7X5TXaZlXnkJUJyeIo+8XOFd XKMFGkFcJuTGx/1fSMJyPi0Sca2o/KLresuoro/HIG30SLI2r7AFb0DtS4cJUlKPjrOq rPMQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532RSbC0kbM04c5hFm/SgqAG45/ZeGcyGQ4hb5z64YKJtMUiuiKX ALAXEv4HPU1vvaaqQduokYwGRD1H7Kgw1odh23Mt/g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxEvC29cm8qYJhmoXprC/DSR+f1HRXCuSH4w0k7UntY5+5gHxLXr1/VjrLnpNuEFN292NFrjfnWopooPM/zwWI=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9dd0:: with SMTP id x16mr1262505ljj.144.1597088333392; Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <01000173c0b07b33-ad0b793a-7afc-4b39-95f8-2f50574d57bb-000000@us-east-1.amazonses.com>
In-Reply-To: <01000173c0b07b33-ad0b793a-7afc-4b39-95f8-2f50574d57bb-000000@us-east-1.amazonses.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:38:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHTP5boMJpCvhjd=Ur9sTr-+Ea0gSzOJnY_YToHGdurhsA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
Cc: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c98b5505ac8b1a43"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/0u80fRPrwU-ff0S4bzoUNpwMF7s>
Subject: Re: [netconf] Adoption-suitability for draft-unyte-netconf-distributed-notif
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, 10 Aug 2020 19:38:57 -0000

Hi,

I am trying to understand what problem this draft attempts to solve.
It appears from the solution proposal is that the problem to be solved is
the lack of message generator identifiers associated with configured
subscriptions.
These identifiers could presumably help a client understand some
implementation details
related to a subscription.  The solution seems to rely on the
message-generator-id
field in the notification message (which does not exist in current RFCs).

I do not understand why the client needs this feature.


Andy


On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 3:14 PM Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> wrote:

> NETCONF WG,
>
> Per the previous email sent moments ago, the chairs would like to solicit
> input on the following draft:
>
>    Title: Subscription to Distributed Notifications
>    Link: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-unyte-netconf-distributed-notif
>    Abstract:
>
>       This documents describes extensions to the YANG notifications
>       subscription to allow metrics being published directly from
>       processors on line cards to target receivers, while subscription is
>       still maintained at the route processor in a distributed forwarding
>       system.
>
>
> In particular, please discuss adoption-suitability as it regards to the
> following questions:
>
>     1) is the problem important for the NETCONF WG to solve?
>     2) is the draft a suitable basis for the work?
>
>
> PS: this message is itself not an adoption poll, but rather an attempt to
> gauge interest/support for a potential future adoption poll.
>
> NETCONF Chairs
> _______________________________________________
> netconf mailing list
> netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email