Re: [netconf] restconf collections

Kent Watsen <> Sat, 26 September 2020 17:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 815A33A0B77 for <>; Sat, 26 Sep 2020 10:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FhF2YPGRJKNw for <>; Sat, 26 Sep 2020 10:13:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 777413A0B6B for <>; Sat, 26 Sep 2020 10:13:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=224i4yxa5dv7c2xz3womw6peuasteono;; t=1601140028; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:Feedback-ID; bh=aMjg2U5y4NuFUp5FxEoLOZ39V/+tZ+N2yZ3tQ2rCATc=; b=cJ2j/W4hzeJgAySD+cuRKStlT1UslQ2EriwpgdC5jXO5Gg0tn3+B0FtChgg7yDXe kIN74lcU7Ukv9FSMscHQgD5RBZ7fjGYZXWYe0E6BOU3i5zmI50vf6MkegD2fBKWqOtu FOZqZ3CRxKSheZ/wPx23xFFt/Pdcbwm4YmLxeyws=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
From: Kent Watsen <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2020 17:07:07 +0000
Cc: "" <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
To: Andy Bierman <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
X-SES-Outgoing: 2020.09.26-
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netconf] restconf collections
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2020 17:13:18 -0000

Hi Andy,

> Our customers agree with you.  Some of them only use our <get-bulk>, and stopped using <get> and <get-config>.

> Since it is implemented as an RPC, all YANG-based protocols can use it.
> Obviously you need XPath filtering (XSLT-style) to select the list entries of interest.
> Count and depth and other parameters from <get> are also useful.
> (My concern is that the IETF version will be too complex to implement or use as the feature list grows.)


> There is no extra complexity to support config vs. operational data.
> I don't see the value in restricting the operation.

Okay.  This appears to be the prevailing interest.

> It is easy. Use RPC operations which map to RESTCONF POST automatically.


These RPCs could also be used for RESTCONF, but much better would be to use query parameters in the GET calls.