Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6241 (4856)

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Mon, 19 December 2016 16:14 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 30776129BC3 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:14:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 FaSjXrmARGS0 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:14:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (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 C407C129BB0 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:14:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id q68so19964727qki.1 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:14:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TLfHIt7KVdi+vIxT+jETcCK3RF/DEi159tyCH2vOnrA=; b=iJWnGEEvEo0N/s3PH13cW8VzC+fZm7G8THKn/vKXZ2k9tb9YnBA5q5xsrgwjvhTjDA Sq+fV1F5CwDvtnrLz7tCkNVv0zEbyShM8VtRKgwqf9L8HS+ktNHKBN7+xIz/vUgL2SCi Vcstg2uXA68+eezZycfA1VdRbUh/29TrfEeQCWI+67j3bjTJe2NKoBVsbpXjX8ehZ6SE 3qFuLJ0UiwdkPXFemLhC/6dyT1TNYuPOeY5d4PyEZ114+5Dol3wSMUJhmlZK8QSpq8yp h8bKFEzGOuxGTXltkdlB/UiHW8OmG+FeNJzs/rhu1fWGpcNgEdyOoPFZ6Md9lcR7Ib9+ lK4Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TLfHIt7KVdi+vIxT+jETcCK3RF/DEi159tyCH2vOnrA=; b=YX0StvCICdLJAszxa1mrv7JWI+61Ioz9xIa4EXDnovkFqwO97KnuDd+I2gwDPPVzXB jVyw11cHzrFuDP7NM0h9jaXWCMpWdvTFVzCUkJEDouDpgBeJQ7NT9sYSy4xcR2MRryKs T4xtb+wzwiQT8vkshExi3cUpoHZ4s3zSG0i1zu/wc1ttSJkqqvQwgwa1aNlZrzyh43zP 1nO4gj/13HSp6ldCsFVdX5ZohvuqUajo5JYed0BXZ5oRjw7G6lTtBT2SyGB5nwJGomA4 STK2T3UDu9s1REf7Qr7ZQ66qLBNO2lwxLto76Fv6x3z9OoNJbvHWkoQuyHAyVEtIp+mv TI/g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJsd2XAr4fuUkN6dyeGDbTASF0lzwmnkgZJtfXxH5lIMMV38ozTdjLRpqOGNiHtvwcerJRTTaqiiYsuhw==
X-Received: by 10.55.22.97 with SMTP id g94mr1342375qkh.287.1482164085891; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:14:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.12.175.113 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:14:45 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <484cbbb6-e11d-9ad5-cfce-cfed667ceded@cisco.com>
References: <20161108093217.CC0C7B808C2@rfc-editor.org> <484cbbb6-e11d-9ad5-cfce-cfed667ceded@cisco.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:14:45 -0800
Message-ID: <CABCOCHRLritCXGW1cRgF2iE=xM_VmhTZUvZvcUbMYEf1g72j=Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114967ead6cc10054405378c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/BNr0fzQQrC1q_Tnd1hdd2ixMnJk>
Cc: Rob Enns <rob.enns@gmail.com>, "Ersue, Mehmet (Nokia - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nokia.com>, Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>, Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6241 (4856)
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 16:14:55 -0000

Hi,

this should be rejected.
The changed text implies that different configurations are present,
each derived from some unspecified subset of modules.
This is not correct.


Andy


On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 2:57 AM, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Please let me know what you think of this errata.
>
> Regards, Benoit.
>
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6241,
>> "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)".
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> You may review the report below and at:
>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6241&eid=4856
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> Type: Technical
>> Reported by: frank feng <frank.fengchong@huawei.com>
>>
>> Section: 7.2
>>
>> Original Text
>> -------------
>> config:  A hierarchy of configuration data as defined by one of
>>           the device's data models.  The contents MUST be placed in an
>>           appropriate namespace, to allow the device to detect the
>>           appropriate data model, and the contents MUST follow the
>>           constraints of that data model, as defined by its capability
>>           definition.  Capabilities are discussed in Section 8.
>>
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>> config:  A hierarchy of configuration data as defined by one or more of
>>           the device's data models.  The contents MUST be placed in an
>>           appropriate namespace, to allow the device to detect the
>>           appropriate data model, and the contents MUST follow the
>>           constraints of that data model, as defined by its capability
>>           definition.  Capabilities are discussed in Section 8.
>>
>> Notes
>> -----
>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC6241 (draft-ietf-netconf-4741bis-10)
>> --------------------------------------
>> Title               : Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)
>> Publication Date    : June 2011
>> Author(s)           : R. Enns, Ed., M. Bjorklund, Ed., J. Schoenwaelder,
>> Ed., A. Bierman, Ed.
>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>> Source              : Network Configuration
>> Area                : Operations and Management
>> Stream              : IETF
>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>> .
>>
>>
>