Re: [netconf] RFC 6241 Ambiguity

Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net> Tue, 14 May 2019 18:45 UTC

Return-Path: <0100016ab7a9af7e-cd7f776e-79e1-42a4-9c5d-d04aed0d8fa1-000000@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 86D09120267 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 May 2019 11:45:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, 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 hRxHtGFzRCw4 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 May 2019 11:45:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a8-33.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-33.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E02C120283 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2019 11:45:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=6gbrjpgwjskckoa6a5zn6fwqkn67xbtw; d=amazonses.com; t=1557859512; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:Feedback-ID; bh=VncKDD/CdD4+ElvribSERuAjzufSLfv8F4q9ks/6I0U=; b=LSSNj3QVgAGYg/svMkVDSA1WBma+ekgUeFhjGnxpvbxnSObVrbTDiY4mTpkMzvlj kXtqmsloQwwNzRzBG6Q2IsBDuC9WnpceHIppIuh4z99etf6f8HQ34jEnYdZFNYeC/o5 TwYSEJ2wlykzM1xpLTlfSlpK+LCNSlWUR5sEoyJ4=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
From: Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net>
In-Reply-To: <eme2e51d99-6140-4142-b89f-db5e4c6e2a88@morpheus>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 18:45:12 +0000
Cc: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <0100016ab7a9af7e-cd7f776e-79e1-42a4-9c5d-d04aed0d8fa1-000000@email.amazonses.com>
References: <em35e87021-fa76-4888-a383-8b34e960175f@morpheus> <0100016aa75956af-70018fb1-15f8-4394-8ffd-4f4d5b2d7b3f-000000@email.amazonses.com> <CABCOCHScSp8AEjcgSd7tX-Va45y51CxK-b_hO4nd3SzW9rTUKA@mail.gmail.com> <eme2e51d99-6140-4142-b89f-db5e4c6e2a88@morpheus>
To: Jonathan Hansford <jonathan@hansfords.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
X-SES-Outgoing: 2019.05.14-54.240.8.33
Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/FVlMJeIm9XgDWPnIMbiymrV62zM>
Subject: Re: [netconf] RFC 6241 Ambiguity
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: Tue, 14 May 2019 18:45:18 -0000

> So I need to contact the RFC Editor to correct Erratum 5397, with the relevant text in sections 7.8 and 7.9 being changed to something like:
> 
> 7.8: "If a NETCONF server receives a <close-session> request while processing a confirmed commit (Section 8.4) for that session, unless the confirmed commit is a persistent confirmed commit, it MUST restore the configuration to its state before the confirmed commit was issued. A persistent confirmed commit MUST survive session termination."
> 
> 7.9: "If a NETCONF server receives a <kill-session> request while processing a confirmed commit (Section 8.4) for the session to be killed, unless the confirmed commit is a persistent confirmed commit, it MUST restore the configuration to its state before the confirmed commit was issued. A persistent confirmed commit MUST survive session termination."

Ideally, Errata 5397 is deleted (because I think that it's clear that Section 8.4 overrides the 7.8 behavior) but, if we have to patch the errata, I might suggests:

For Section 7.8
  OLD (in RFC 6241)

    The server will release any locks
    and resources associated with the session and gracefully close any
    associated connections.

  NEW:

    The server will release any locks
    and resources, associated with the session and gracefully close any
    associated connections.  As an exception to the previous sentence, if
    the session is processing a persistent confirmed commit (Section 8.4),
    the resources necessary for supporting confirmed commit are not released.

For Section 7.9:
  OLD (in RFC 6241)

      If a NETCONF server receives a <kill-session> request while
      processing a confirmed commit (Section 8.4), it MUST restore the
      configuration to its state before the confirmed commit was issued.

  NEW:
      What you have above seems fine, though I'd leave off the last sentence.


> I also need to contact the RFC Editor to correct Erratum 3821 to change:
> 
> If the session issuing a sequence of one or more confirmed commits is
> terminated for any reason before the confirm timeout expires, the server
> MUST restore the configuration to its state before the sequence of
> confirmed commits was issued, unless the last confirmed commit also
> included a <persist> element.
> 
> If the device reboots for any reason before the confirm timeout
> expires, the server MUST restore the configuration to its state
> before the sequence of confirmed commits was issued.
> 
> to something like:
> 
> If the session issuing a sequence of one or more confirmed commits is
> terminated for any reason before the confirm timeout expires, the server
> MUST restore the configuration to its state before the sequence of
> confirmed commits was issued, unless the confirmed commit is a
> persistent confirmed commit.
> 
> If the device reboots for any reason before the confirm timeout
> expires, unless a persistent confirmed commit is in progress, the 
> server MUST restore the configuration to its state before the
> sequence of confirmed commits was issued.
> 
>  A persistent confirmed commit MUST survive session termination.
> 

This seems okay but, again, I'd leave out the last sentence.


Side note: huge errata are hard to read without a diff.  If a lot of text, then the NEW (or the NOTES) should include a diff highlighting exactly what changed.

Kent // contributor



> Are those errata OK? 
>