Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8072 (5131)

[Andy Bierman <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Robert Wilton <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Kent,
>
> But the previous paragraph in the draft states:
>
>    The "merge", "replace", "create", "delete", and "remove" edit
>    operations have exactly the same meanings as those defined for the
>    "operation" attribute described in Section 7.2 of [RFC6241] <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6241#section-7.2>.
>
>
>
> That NETCONF section allows "merge" and "replace" on nodes that don't
> exist (they are just created).  Also a "remove" on a data node that doesn't
> exist doesn't return any error.  It is just a silent no-op.
>
> So, it seems that the YANG Patch semantics are not the same as for
> NETCONF, which seems to conflict with the previous paragraph quoted above.
>

YANG Patch returns an error for delete on a missing target resource  and
none of the
the other operations listed in that paragraph.  They do behave the same.


> Thanks,
> Rob
>

Andy


>
>
> On 11/10/2017 16:36, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
> I think the existing text is correct.  If the resource instance doesn't exist, it can only be created.  If it doesn't exist, then it cannot be merged, replaced, deleted, or removed.
>
> Kent (co-author)
>
> --
>
> Dear YANG Patch Media Type authors,
>
> What do you think of this proposed errata?
>
> Regards, B.
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8072,
> "YANG Patch Media Type".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_errata_eid5131&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=KLQjPIYskU70WRcZ0nCQYZ4njobUB-tkMpQKKEBb8eE&s=5HhVTU7yZdrq0Ztpkqoqb2_yUmZJ9pk7jGCpEDJSLr0&e=
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Robert Wilton <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
>
> Section: 2.2
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> Regarding section 2.2 of RFC 8072, the third paragraph states:
>
>
>                                         ... If the edit does not identify
>      any existing resource instance and the operation for the edit is not
>      "create", then the request MUST NOT be processed and a "404 Not
>      Found" error response MUST be sent by the server.
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>                                        ... If the edit does not identify
>     any existing resource instance and the operation for the edit is
>     "delete" or "move" then the request MUST NOT be processed and a
>     "404 Not Found" error response MUST be sent by the server.
>
> Notes
> -----
> As per the second paragraph of section 2.2 of RFC 8072, the operations are expected to mirror the semantics of the "operation" attribute described in Section 7.2 of [RFC6241].
>
> The spec also doesn't specify what happens if it is a "create" operation and the resource already exists.  It should probably also state that "400 Bad Request" is returned.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8072 (draft-ietf-netconf-yang-patch-14)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : YANG Patch Media Type
> Publication Date    : February 2017
> Author(s)           : A. Bierman, M. Bjorklund, K. Watsen
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Network Configuration
> Area                : Operations and Management
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
> .
>
>
>
>