IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] Some discussion points re: RFC 5277bis and YANG push

Jonathan Hansford <jonathan@hansfords.net> Mon, 04 July 2016 11:16 UTC

Return-Path: <jonathan@hansfords.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 1BB83127058 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 04:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.789
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.789 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=hansfords.net
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 A2v_oAgv1Ss7 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 04:16:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server.myfast.site (server.myfast.site [212.113.130.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2463D12B064 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 04:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hansfords.net; s=default; h=Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date: Subject:From:Cc:To:MIME-Version:Sender:Reply-To:Message-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=sMGiG03BUVEUUYyJMp+FoSR1J66dIiPPdoD2uuDh26k=; b=Wn5Z8I/ahLai5i6wB7GEBHHQy jARUeJVcVaRxwq9NyxP9yiDH+9w80zdZhAHn7q08VVDm3KAnb0QnPMjmnYCTKXuEqQJNd0b8uz2wx S9VFsHLm+x5W3GIzAxbFHbwqo8nbxVraoagaoH2eE9lKNQW7p8cdjNOpIm6LEZoOxJ7CFa45FPCW1 OLqNOr9RrAqQPgxaiRuIn0nUNSpSAbF7LlY2tuPSaMW+FExGxdAOqP7bifYO90c5TBbsVrR8Wd8eU GH2LGZPmAnPrrBDQnMGFDZ2Dc1tcGVCJrCtrTyKc9zdUT0mDRBPhIPm8lChgakMPF14n9r9/hZae8 jZWIv9UvA==;
Received: from host-92-19-235-90.static.as13285.net ([92.19.235.90]:50817 helo=[IPv6:::ffff:192.168.1.220]) by server.myfast.site with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <jonathan@hansfords.net>) id 1bK1rC-001gqH-2N; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 12:16:06 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, "alex@cisco.com" <alex@cisco.com>
From: Jonathan Hansford <jonathan@hansfords.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 12:24:00 +0100
Importance: normal
X-Priority: 3
In-Reply-To: <20160701.125757.71813639576051509.mbj@tail-f.com>
References: <ede3eb47e628458381d3a641083a29ce@XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com> <20160701.125757.71813639576051509.mbj@tail-f.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_DF3A4F4A-3AC1-438F-88E5-2C821A19F464_"
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server.myfast.site
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - hansfords.net
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server.myfast.site: authenticated_id: jonathan@hansfords.net
X-Authenticated-Sender: server.myfast.site: jonathan@hansfords.net
Message-Id: <20160704111610.2463D12B064@ietfa.amsl.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/GOmjMLtArFzE994PL_LL9r_zO1M>
Cc: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] Some discussion points re: RFC 5277bis and YANG push
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, 04 Jul 2016 11:16:13 -0000

+1

From: Martin Bjorklund
Sent: 01 July 2016 11:57
To: alex@cisco.com
Cc: netconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Netconf] Some discussion points re: RFC 5277bis and YANG push

Hi,

I think this would be a useful feature.  It would be harmless in most
use cases, and useful in some specific use cases, e.g. generic proxies
etc.


/martin


"Alexander Clemm (alex)" <alex@cisco.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> draft-gonzalez-netconf-5277bis is another one of the drafts in the set
> of drafts concerning event notifications and yang-push.
> 
> One of the items wort bringing for discussion concerns the notion of
> control plane notifications that are used to indicate the status of a
> notification subscription.  Examples of such notifications are
> "replayComplete", "subscription-modified" (in case case of configured
> subscriptions), and "subscription-suspended" (of particular importance
> for draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push, another draft in the set, used by
> the server to notify a client in case notification updates cannot be
> sent as promised under various rainy-day scenarios).
> 
> What makes those notifications different from other notifications is
> that they are not of general concern, but of concern only for a
> particular association.  As a subscriber to event notifications, I
> should only receive those notifications that concern "my"
> subscription, not those that concern someone else's subscription.
> 
> The way we are planning to address this is through introduction of an
> extension "control-plane-notif".  This extension is used to tag
> definitions of notifications used for control / signaling purposes
> that are therefore not part of the general NETCONF event stream.
> Instead, notifications thus tagged are part of a signaling event
> stream that is part of the signaling/control association implied by
> the subscription.  Like push-notifications themselves, there is a need
> to distinguish notifications subscribable by everyone and notification
> instances used by a server to notify items of significance to a
> specific client, or set of clients.  Please refer also to section 7 of
> the draft
> (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gonzalez-netconf-5277bis-02#section-7
> ).
> 
> We have been discussing this issue as part of the weekly calls in
> which a subteam of NETCONF WG participants are discussing the set of
> of related drafts and think this is one of the issues that we should
> bring to the attention of and solicit feedback from the WG as a whole.
> 
> Thoughts?
> --- Alex
> (on behalf of the team)
> 

_______________________________________________
Netconf mailing list
Netconf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email