Re: [netconf] time to meet today after 5pm

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com> Wed, 10 April 2019 08:30 UTC

Return-Path: <eckelcu@cisco.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 D3E661202CF; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 01:30:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 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_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=WfB/gxHv; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=BP+XH1yQ
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 Wf1DuI1MrJty; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 01:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48A181202CE; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 01:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1930; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1554884999; x=1556094599; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=J1uhRaEaro8CRsgivwFnhJD6tiGRiWbkELxqNDecn0M=; b=WfB/gxHv55VccPV/ncVshMCtbNEAi7r6/Hv+JZ+ppWD/FCdiBKAteTJy YqNJmPACvJwmIliZpHAsDS6IbrY3TLn9odYdYGXxYL5ELLHpaCgJBX1aF rnipuEoqiQLNF320IKJzhDwNwCQYxYp5eAFYgTEVV8A+JUA9wuJxKcktu c=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AEtsWsRIsgQwacFi6CNmcpTVXNCE6p7X5OBIU4Z?= =?us-ascii?q?M7irVIN76u5InmIFeBvad2lFGcW4Ld5roEkOfQv636EU04qZea+DFnEtRXUg?= =?us-ascii?q?Mdz8AfngguGsmAXEDwL/PuZDESF8VZX1gj9Ha+YgBY?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BVAAA/qK1c/5tdJa1lGwEBAQEDAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BBwMBAQGBUQYBAQELAYE9UANoVCAECyeEDoNHA4RSilaCMiWXGIEugSQDVA4?= =?us-ascii?q?BARsRhEACF4VPIjQJDQEBAwEBCQECAQJtHAyFSgEBAQMBIxEMAQE3AQ8CAQg?= =?us-ascii?q?OCgICJgICAjAVEAIEDgWDIgGBXQMNCAGhXQKKFHGBL4J5AQEFhQQYggwDBYE?= =?us-ascii?q?LJQGLRheBf4E4DBOCTD6ELhaDCjGCJosOggiYcwkClAITB5Rfn1ACBAIEBQI?= =?us-ascii?q?OAQEFgU84gVZwFWUBgkGCCoNvhFmFenKBKI9FAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,332,1549929600"; d="scan'208";a="260520570"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 10 Apr 2019 08:29:58 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com (xch-aln-002.cisco.com [173.36.7.12]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x3A8TwhQ004105 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:29:58 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:29:57 -0500
Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:29:56 -0500
Received: from NAM04-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:29:56 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-cisco-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=J1uhRaEaro8CRsgivwFnhJD6tiGRiWbkELxqNDecn0M=; b=BP+XH1yQMROgxqTI4xhvHLDPXqfKHPD7mwV9stbUduBEYb6X79YnmaUP/Rtj3dPFm+wmcdUIIata7W5mH9PNPLOJicLp28AOoXrTciwNliC8RyPQU6ipqRbAygDf2OvOqruS8nnzmvGclz02LH1G3IoNM1EQva8t0htK8CjptZI=
Received: from MWHPR11MB0031.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.164.204.27) by MWHPR11MB1760.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.175.53.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1792.15; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:29:54 +0000
Received: from MWHPR11MB0031.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::584f:10a3:3b55:67b]) by MWHPR11MB0031.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::584f:10a3:3b55:67b%6]) with mapi id 15.20.1771.016; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:29:54 +0000
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, "httpbis-chairs@ietf.org" <httpbis-chairs@ietf.org>, "netconf-chairs@ietf.org" <netconf-chairs@ietf.org>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netconf] time to meet today after 5pm
Thread-Index: AQHU6vCNgvMqKxW42UOukw8bvA9ZS6YsEPAAgAASFACAABgwAIAIHy0AgAA9vwCAAKKpgA==
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:29:54 +0000
Message-ID: <E0BA5C69-47A0-4280-B75D-D3B39AA78AC6@cisco.com>
References: <01000169def07790-5f902f1b-ddce-438b-8e05-d4b7e82818bc-000000@email.amazonses.com> <CAOdDvNoDFoa30tJ8XDz482_38rw8+ajwW4+dSx7s_psoFY7ukQ@mail.gmail.com> <56E946DC-A690-4B1E-8FB5-683473955C5D@gmail.com> <20190404.163346.857364419603319540.mbj@tail-f.com> <CAOdDvNq4bLXtdDD7WdXbH-e14-i_yy50ADm59YtOKW5buaCjOg@mail.gmail.com> <01000169e94f9d0d-7f85f47b-9f92-41a2-94b1-0061bb9bdb3d-000000@email.amazonses.com> <B21C3F25-221B-4EE3-A981-D4EE49864C06@cisco.com> <1783839F-4A70-46BA-8DC4-C386CE8A07C0@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <1783839F-4A70-46BA-8DC4-C386CE8A07C0@mnot.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.17.1.190326
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=eckelcu@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c0:1006::88]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a2d62522-8bf4-444c-bf83-08d6bd8eb588
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600139)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:MWHPR11MB1760;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MWHPR11MB1760:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MWHPR11MB1760121D061B323773EA3464B22E0@MWHPR11MB1760.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 00032065B2
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(396003)(366004)(136003)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(199004)(189003)(4326008)(2616005)(71200400001)(476003)(966005)(478600001)(14454004)(68736007)(6246003)(11346002)(71190400001)(446003)(83716004)(486006)(25786009)(186003)(81156014)(6306002)(6512007)(86362001)(81166006)(97736004)(53936002)(46003)(36756003)(5660300002)(8676002)(229853002)(99286004)(58126008)(316002)(7736002)(6436002)(54906003)(305945005)(8936002)(82746002)(6116002)(106356001)(102836004)(53546011)(256004)(93886005)(6506007)(6916009)(76176011)(105586002)(2906002)(33656002)(6486002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MWHPR11MB1760; H:MWHPR11MB0031.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 5lyFZwli0dGON7iKqoEPVxBy4JO4zXptsCwiGFxjo2XvRHKzacjrDu958Zf04MKB9On63HZoH0JwVJXTJ5UyhsKFXzO6mPjgknPMvlYiRHb5erD+QxDFmQ1brup3osI8fuFhuK1I8uM1kDhoTrqtJSX49CpbvnmKcdD4Cbu8JvpmVAZTwHBf5tgXbWm9KWsnNDX1I01WeROdWqI81CLuAr0dNYOwGZOQho4JpbT+sKzqVWtGXrGUnV89el+WdK3o88QVzXV9S4UJZR0EweqMMvlYuOCIIblTxZAMI41UFbHFgAsiP46z2x4VC1dVXMefrqFZT/3Jm/CymRg8ZcwWmhl8BTh+2OkXtjik0tjukaBEi2LtcSuxnJMj/bImxA4Swt3EGmZVTDcfjC6kGtjqCbHynTBCrXzJpj4j6quJ7Xs=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <AAC458C93265424DBF9FF9E915A5FF3D@namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a2d62522-8bf4-444c-bf83-08d6bd8eb588
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Apr 2019 08:29:54.5795 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR11MB1760
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.12, xch-aln-002.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/5vmERGyGFqPY_d5C61E7wLyeoRg>
Subject: Re: [netconf] time to meet today after 5pm
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: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:30:02 -0000

On 4/10/19, 2:48 AM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

    Charles,
    
    > On 10 Apr 2019, at 5:06 am, Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <eckelcu@cisco.com> wrote:
    > 
    > I would recommend against adding any keepalive mechanism to RESTCONF. Strongly recommending the use of HTTPS when using RESTCONF is fine, but keep in mind that RESTCONF was created, and is viewed in the industry, as a “REST-like” alternative to NETCONF. The tradeoff is functionality built into the protocol vs. complexity of writing an application that uses the protocol. It is trivial to make individual RESTCONF requests but more difficult for an application to implement network transactions using RESTCONF than if using NETCONF. An application developer is free to choose the right protocol for the job. Adding complexity to RESTCONF that make it less REST-like would be a mistake, in my opinion.
    
    What do you mean by "REST-like"?

With RESTCONF, the YANG models supported by the RESTCONF server result in it exposing RESTful or REST-like APIs to the RESTCONF client. You can view the RESTCONF server as supporting a set of REST APIs with some additional conventions/requirements on the structure on the URIs, such as the root of the RESTCONF API, use of specific HTTP response codes, etc.

Cheers,
Charles
    
    Cheers,
    
    --
    Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/