Re: [netconf] AUTH48 changes to RFC 8526 <draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-08>

Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net> Fri, 08 February 2019 01:48 UTC

Return-Path: <01000168caca357c-d61d3242-b8ab-44ea-9afd-d9d0084cfc4c-000000@amazonses.watsen.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 9D27F128B14 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 17:48:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 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_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.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 ge4A951czgCu for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 17:47:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from a8-88.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-88.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75E2C1274D0 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 17:47:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=ug7nbtf4gccmlpwj322ax3p6ow6yfsug; d=amazonses.com; t=1549590476; h=From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:Feedback-ID; bh=I24i7b7oyRL05gfVRPKwmR707gHlUPiTHNTZs7rruOc=; b=L6h5zNXe6Z1MfJey0Ybm5y4pcGqkvnGpYAS6+hsPNdaBSVmq67QFTrlwuiWgq3oj iqyJ12//7agsSGT90Cz8cMmumpdGsoa8BTP5ICjJxR1R34nNlnl34UPpIxeHsvyush6 JD+qirTrxapc6CoQeMOODkOIWZdfqzy5/4y5Jqv8=
From: Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net>
Message-ID: <01000168caca357c-d61d3242-b8ab-44ea-9afd-d9d0084cfc4c-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_23184D33-F409-463F-987A-4EBF8915CB64"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 01:47:56 +0000
In-Reply-To: <FEED2E09-F652-44C4-AB3F-DC8B3D4344A2@gmail.com>
Cc: Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com>, Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
References: <E27BF6D6-8FC9-491A-A338-9830D750F3A7@gmail.com> <20190206214947.hzvp3ccswjxvxesu@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <D1C795C4-C79F-4E2E-899A-184A9E34ED6A@gmail.com> <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BCF0FE6@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> <FEED2E09-F652-44C4-AB3F-DC8B3D4344A2@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
X-SES-Outgoing: 2019.02.08-54.240.8.88
Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/BVRQw1MvPNCMYbfmjgaeb03beDQ>
Subject: Re: [netconf] AUTH48 changes to RFC 8526 <draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-08>
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: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 01:48:01 -0000

These are semantically identical statements.  
Let’s ask the RFC Editor for their opinion.  
FWIW, I prefer Rohit’s suggested replacement.

Kent // as co-author



> On Feb 7, 2019, at 7:29 PM, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>; wrote:
> 
> Authors of the draft,
> 
> Do we want to accept or reject this late comment?
> 
>> On Feb 6, 2019, at 6:06 PM, Rohit R Ranade <rohitrranade@huawei.com <mailto:rohitrranade@huawei.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> >           leaf-list negated-origin-filter {
>> >             type or:origin-ref;
>> >             description
>> >               "Filter based on the 'origin' annotation.  A
>> >                configuration node matches the filter if its 'origin'
>> >                annotation is not derived from and not equal to any of
>> >                the given filter values.";
>> >           }
>>  
>>  
>> Sorry for the late comment.  I think this should be “neither derived-from nor equal to any of the given filter values”
>>  
>> I think if it is derived-from but not matching the filter value, this filter should apply.
>>  
>> With Regards,
>> Rohit
>>  
>> From: netconf [mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Mahesh Jethanandani
>> Sent: 07 February 2019 03:46
>> To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de <mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>>
>> Cc: Netconf <netconf@ietf.org <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [netconf] AUTH48 changes to RFC 8526 <draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-08>
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> On Feb 6, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de <mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>> wrote:
>>  
>> Mahesh,
>> 
>> can we assume that this edit is accepted and we can resume the AUTH48
>> process?
>>  
>> Yes. 
>>  
>> This closes the one week review period. No comments were received on the further clarifications proposed by the authors. As such, we will now let the RFC Editor know to proceed with making the proposed changes.
>>  
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> /js
>> 
>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:54:54AM -0800, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
>> 
>> NETCONF WG,
>> 
>> During the AUTH48 review of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-08, the authors found a couple of things that needed further clarification. The edits are reflected in this e-mail using OLD: and NEW:. Since the changes are technical changes, we needed to make sure that the WG was ok with the changes. This starts a one week review period terminating next Tuesday, February 5 to provide any comments you might have. If providing comments, please be specific in the changes you would like to see, preferably using your own OLD: and NEW:. If no comments are received, it will be deemed that the changes are fine with the WG. The two set of changes are in the YANG model itself, and in Section 3.1.1.4.
>> 
>> In the YANG model:
>> 
>> OLD:
>> 
>>        choice origin-filters {
>>          when 'derived-from-or-self(datastore, "ds:operational")';
>>          if-feature "origin";
>>          description
>>            "Filters based on the 'origin' annotation.";
>>          leaf-list origin-filter {
>>            type or:origin-ref;
>>            description
>>              "Filter based on the 'origin' annotation.  A node matches
>>               the filter if its 'origin' annotation is derived from or
>>               equal to any of the given filter values.";
>>          }
>>          leaf-list negated-origin-filter {
>>            type or:origin-ref;
>>            description
>>              "Filter based on the 'origin' annotation.  A node matches
>>               the filter if its 'origin' annotation is not derived
>>               from and not equal to any of the given filter values.";
>>          }
>>        }
>> 
>> NEW:
>> 
>>        choice origin-filters {
>>          when 'derived-from-or-self(datastore, "ds:operational")';
>>          if-feature origin;
>>          description
>>            "Filters configuration nodes based on the 'origin'
>>             annotation.  Configuration nodes that do not have an
>>             'origin' annotation are treated as if they have the
>>             'origin' annotation 'or:unknown'.
>> 
>>             System state nodes are not affected by origin-filters and
>>             thus not filtered.  Note that system state nodes can be
>>             filtered with the 'config-filter' leaf.";
>> 
>>          leaf-list origin-filter {
>>            type or:origin-ref;
>>            description
>>              "Filter based on the 'origin' annotation.  A
>>               configuration node matches the filter if its 'origin'
>>               annotation is derived from or equal to any of the given
>>               filter values.";
>>          }
>>          leaf-list negated-origin-filter {
>>            type or:origin-ref;
>>            description
>>              "Filter based on the 'origin' annotation.  A
>>               configuration node matches the filter if its 'origin'
>>               annotation is not derived from and not equal to any of
>>               the given filter values.";
>>          }
>>        }
>> 
>> OLD:
>> 
>>        leaf config-filter {
>>          type boolean;
>>          description
>>            "Filter for nodes with the given value for their
>>             'config' property.  If this leaf is not present, all
>>             nodes are selected.
>> 
>>             For example, when this leaf is set to 'true', only 'config
>>             true' nodes are selected.";
>>        }
>> 
>> NEW:
>> 
>>        leaf config-filter {
>>          type boolean;
>>          description
>>            "Filter for nodes with the given value for their 'config'
>>             property.  When this leaf is set to 'true', only 'config
>>             true' nodes are selected and, when set to ‘false’, only
>>             ‘config false’ nodes are selected.  If this leaf is not
>>             present, no nodes are filtered.";
>>        }
>> 
>> Add the following example to 3.1.1.4:
>> 
>>    In order to not retrieve any system state nodes, the
>>    "config-filter" can be used:
>> 
>>    <rpc message-id="103"
>>         xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
>>      <get-data xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-nmda"
>>                xmlns:ds="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-datastores"
>>                xmlns:or="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-origin">
>>        <datastore>ds:operational</datastore>
>>        <subtree-filter>
>>          <bgp xmlns="http://example.com/ns/bgp <http://example.com/ns/bgp> <http://example.com/ns/bgp <http://example.com/ns/bgp>>"/>
>>        </subtree-filter>
>>        <config-filter>true</config-filter>
>>        <origin-filter>or:intended</origin-filter>
>>        <origin-filter>or:system</origin-filter>
>>        <with-origin/>
>>      </get-data>
>>    </rpc>
>> 
>>    <rpc-reply message-id="103"
>>               xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
>>      <data xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-nmda">
>>        <bgp xmlns="http://example.com/ns/bgp <http://example.com/ns/bgp> <http://example.com/ns/bgp <http://example.com/ns/bgp>>"
>>             xmlns:or="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-origin"
>>             or:origin="or:intended">
>>          <peer>
>>            <name>2001:db8::2:3</name>
>>            <local-port or:origin="or:system">60794</local-port>
>>          </peer>
>>        </bgp>
>>      </data>
>>    </rpc-reply>
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> Mahesh Jethanandani // as shepherd
>> mjethanandani@gmail.com <mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> netconf mailing list
>> netconf@ietf.org <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
>> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
>> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/ <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>>
>>  
>> Mahesh Jethanandani
>> mjethanandani@gmail.com <mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> mjethanandani@gmail.com <mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netconf mailing list
> netconf@ietf.org <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>