IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] Anyone want just Configured Subscriptions?

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Tue, 10 July 2018 23:32 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 00DD712426A for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 qV9AlaSAYAam for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outbound-ss-348.hostmonster.com (outbound-ss-348.hostmonster.com [74.220.202.212]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33756130E23 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmgw10.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.9.0.10]) by gproxy6.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D56131F35A9 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:11:46 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id czvGfGdExjnCqczvGfsq7o; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:11:47 -0600
X-Authority-Reason: nr=8
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=YGkCgXgm7nbmhsgkg9nAkl6lnLpQu9KjKN/ltHicioo=; b=K9xS79qHaATOHAyzxV0HpW5jE/ u95RvguYgDrsKJiuk5XwvF5rSyij+P4Kv2WKynBQqm0sPCkfhBTI3qkK34u8ugDAVMfrw2iU4aVUY vDLkzc+pp96fS3W5h4dVuKMkP;
Received: from pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.86.101]:57462 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1fczTZ-002BKZ-WD; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:43:10 -0600
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, "Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com>
Cc: Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
References: <CABCOCHSfzpj3Kca2RRtNFV6wLLt_6r4p3vfS_j4Hzfai-0Y2gA@mail.gmail.com> <20180708.095807.918450792556408986.mbj@tail-f.com> <20180708100310.gn3xaol66f7c7lo5@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <20180708.180552.1582913595227099806.mbj@tail-f.com> <CABCOCHQfirYPAVJwLELnqw0VJ=js7aFNX9wB7Xcs6Tkw06w1hw@mail.gmail.com> <9c3799f19cf84b22a3659c04a548ba67@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <CABCOCHT=7-dPzTPYLvVN1J12uwGWh9GoA7r5nu=zYYD1nnFwTQ@mail.gmail.com> <273f987e3a224411a01a599afb42f25f@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <20180710193940.jsslo3657wwee6ku@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <051A20E4-26D0-41C9-B93D-2A094E46EFBA@juniper.net>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <c0ab2e56-4c09-6b21-f32e-b0475ef51e37@labn.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:43:06 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <051A20E4-26D0-41C9-B93D-2A094E46EFBA@juniper.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.86.101
X-Source-L: No
X-Exim-ID: 1fczTZ-002BKZ-WD
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.86.101]:57462
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 1
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/2Dctu_uC-RsShgnGUVkW-8SHTQ0>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] Anyone want just Configured Subscriptions?
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing 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: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 23:32:25 -0000


On 7/10/2018 4:37 PM, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
>> So in short, after RFC 8071 call home, you get NC/RC client and server
>> starting with a <hello> exchange. Ideally, the client would indicate
>> its readiness to receive unsolicited notifications before you push
>> notifications to the client (and the notification sender may even be
>> interested to know that it is sending notifications to a remote system
>> that does not just drop them). So either the clients invokes an RPC to
>> start the notification flow or, if you want to optimize one round
>> trip, the client includes a special
>>
>>   :willing-to-receive-unsolicited-notifications
>>
>> capability in the <hello> exchange.
> I agree that a client-advertised capability would be goodness here, but
> it only works for NC-clients, there is no corollary for RC-clients.
>
> Maybe clients should send a "willing-to-receive-unsolicited-notifications"
> RPC instead?
or an an error when an unsolicited notification is received by a client 
that doesn't support it.
(optimizing for what I think suspect will be the common case in the long 
term...)

Lou

>
> Kent // contributor
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email