Re: [netconf] draft-ietf-netconf-udp-notif-10

Benoit Claise <benoit.claise@huawei.com> Mon, 07 August 2023 07:13 UTC

Return-Path: <benoit.claise@huawei.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 872CAC151099 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Aug 2023 00:13:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.091, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P5yVF-SgjZPO for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Aug 2023 00:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99E0BC14CE5E for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Aug 2023 00:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frapeml500001.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.201]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4RK6rq64Xxz6J6Lx; Mon, 7 Aug 2023 15:09:47 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.48.216.224] (10.48.216.224) by frapeml500001.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.94) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.27; Mon, 7 Aug 2023 09:13:19 +0200
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------r10SXrK4H9RL6AbD3eCJXn59"
Message-ID: <58bc1d6d-31a2-5b9d-15fb-8e6f8120babd@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2023 09:13:14 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0
To: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>, netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
References: <8f78607ffe354a09b5bd5c84d4bcd95d@huawei.com> <akrn4urqwqhv4gtyvi26mqoi4qidhzwhss6y5cgcrdhi5bwk65@4my3rjryaazu> <16c3471f7a5c409cbd6ca60ed252609d@huawei.com> <xx32p3wmcfnc5jhyzccieskuirnnnrqjm4lczudcddsssyr2wl@boucgytivgpb> <CABCOCHRw1m2ASyPoEQZp-mxtTmG_pThQc7qvXqkYhqyhLwcUsQ@mail.gmail.com> <tbvxe7kuwh2wevudssdiikeptiny6jl573zah2i73zk2p2lmpm@oq2n4nvvt5mz>
Content-Language: en-GB
From: Benoit Claise <benoit.claise@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <tbvxe7kuwh2wevudssdiikeptiny6jl573zah2i73zk2p2lmpm@oq2n4nvvt5mz>
X-Originating-IP: [10.48.216.224]
X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.180) To frapeml500001.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.94)
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/EWE1qkdxRXVTtYQPsF8iUPAOckM>
Subject: Re: [netconf] draft-ietf-netconf-udp-notif-10
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 07 Aug 2023 07:13:28 -0000


On 8/7/2023 8:50 AM, Jürgen Schönwälder wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 05, 2023 at 08:44:16AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote:
>> Perhaps the scope of the draft should be narrowed so it is only intended to
>> YANG Push or server events that do not need reliable delivery.
>>
> So there needs to be at least a very tight applicability statement.
Well, isn't obvious from the title and abstract? "UDP-based protocol for 
YANG notifications to collect data from networking devices"
Is there really a need to say "the target of this draft is unreliable 
delivery of YANG Push b/c UDP is unreliable"

Regards, Benoit