Re: [netconf] reporting-level enum value

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com> Tue, 09 April 2019 19:19 UTC

Return-Path: <eckelcu@cisco.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 5B9D81203D5 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=iy4m4yJY; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=YI8gB212
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 m5k3AoxpTPDM for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11F8C1203D6 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8085; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1554837542; x=1556047142; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=Fsf8JI4ffQTlSkHn3quPMy53AMenCvu3q2grAcEWru4=; b=iy4m4yJYQXs/Rfz71BcogBzajGiKWTUWaIfEVvVyzgs2O4ISpcKqA7qv Sbber/1WZnJWgCg26ZRJZKHzKp4hDV5oAwDQrnyWfc/aJw7D2CApBxJ1r 54wVZkh2zdOvWhbgaCtGlrlaQQ+Ikci+13enunWMVU4JnV5oDSv3gvQUz Y=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AHFXHUhWe4udnQN62FDLEmFIuXavV8LGuZFwc94?= =?us-ascii?q?YnhrRSc6+q45XlOgnF6O5wiEPSA92J8OpK3uzRta2oGXcN55qMqjgjSNRNTF?= =?us-ascii?q?dE7KdehAk8GIiAAEz/IuTtank3F8dPUFR413q6KkNSXs35Yg6arw=3D=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BVAAD+7qxc/4gNJK1lGwEBAQEDAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BBwMBAQGBUQYBAQELAYEOL1ADaFQgBAsnhA6DRwOEUopWSoINkk6ESoEugSQ?= =?us-ascii?q?DVA4BASyEQAIXhUkiNAkNAQEDAQEJAQIBAm0cDIVKAQEBBCMdAQE4DwIBCBE?= =?us-ascii?q?DAQIrAgICMB0IAgQBEoMiAYERTAMVAaM8AooUcYEvgnkBAQWCRoJAGIIMCIE?= =?us-ascii?q?wAYtGF4F/gTgfgkw+hC42gmoxgiaNFoQulEUJApQCGpRfi1OTfQIEAgQFAg4?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQWBTziBVnAVZQGCQYIKg2+KU3KBKI9FAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,330,1549929600"; d="scan'208,217";a="543595977"
Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 09 Apr 2019 19:19:00 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com (xch-aln-013.cisco.com [173.36.7.23]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x39JJ04e011730 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 9 Apr 2019 19:19:00 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com (173.36.7.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 14:19:00 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 15:18:59 -0400
Received: from NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 14:18:59 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-cisco-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=Fsf8JI4ffQTlSkHn3quPMy53AMenCvu3q2grAcEWru4=; b=YI8gB212Pmtq94fFiE19cbaObCdp+8ceOM8ps+NgpEP6B46XtkS5fpEJXN2LaP4zLfw10NW8WZaahrc/d1tlb3xJVpz3bDfsKhlYpNOTLbF7qVwzqspUKpQZDXX8obBtF+UgqUGruxPMn5DumBGg8DzoZaRKyMppRWYCdCzL8v4=
Received: from MWHPR11MB0031.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.164.204.27) by MWHPR11MB1693.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.169.231.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1771.15; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 19:18:57 +0000
Received: from MWHPR11MB0031.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::584f:10a3:3b55:67b]) by MWHPR11MB0031.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::584f:10a3:3b55:67b%6]) with mapi id 15.20.1771.016; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 19:18:57 +0000
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netconf] reporting-level enum value
Thread-Index: AQHU7HDLrQGEr+AuLkahf0NWQxi4j6Y0Ws2A
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 19:18:57 +0000
Message-ID: <025910F1-FD33-499C-A6E2-F6816FAB5467@cisco.com>
References: <01000169f287fa3f-076e9a88-770f-41b1-9ffe-034061e6eedb-000000@email.amazonses.com>
In-Reply-To: <01000169f287fa3f-076e9a88-770f-41b1-9ffe-034061e6eedb-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.17.1.190326
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=eckelcu@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c0:1005::1d6]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: cbc5e121-6d08-44fb-c137-08d6bd20370b
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600139)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:MWHPR11MB1693;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MWHPR11MB1693:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MWHPR11MB16934A49AFE0412FE638E501B22D0@MWHPR11MB1693.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 000227DA0C
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(346002)(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(376002)(366004)(199004)(189003)(82746002)(14454004)(2501003)(5660300002)(478600001)(446003)(476003)(11346002)(106356001)(2616005)(99286004)(486006)(53936002)(105586002)(97736004)(6512007)(6306002)(186003)(54896002)(8936002)(6116002)(6246003)(36756003)(316002)(71200400001)(256004)(81156014)(6436002)(25786009)(102836004)(8676002)(7736002)(53546011)(33656002)(6506007)(71190400001)(83716004)(6486002)(58126008)(81166006)(4744005)(86362001)(68736007)(110136005)(229853002)(2906002)(76176011)(46003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MWHPR11MB1693; H:MWHPR11MB0031.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: kPW9O9rtW6erti1+R9mgvDe4RtWIHHDy7ZbfaurB+O0mHLkwaO5Uu5EtO6vYk4F2/XKBnrD1e2Ne4nvM/jag8guMQ4S56esd+ni0hl7puI/I/TttgWW2ls7F5FKVj7ebFiU8e+7YJ4fHAlXYrAmDGburThfN8KVcgZ9XmCa6Cd5AX0NAqIYtZy3cEm0fs/9sr/KWty1VgHQCiOQyzzmh9iAvXO9cgMUkJ34hYncXUZb9NMkd9SovQGM1wLK7/RoEgvUR7DiniZM8jv+npEQPFZMqQmVcesI1giqoIGh9oBBqg95z2NkubLtdY9jrPH8ZiwOVrJVsG8b8xiJDjdg+1FlmLP637UogLfAroCHCIeCN0Tf6CBQqWrQLfulbgfgdXUV0ycyLlZh/g76iFmq91eNTUnsKqXnl9bhdg0BnOfQ=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_025910F1FD33499CA6E2F6816FAB5467ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: cbc5e121-6d08-44fb-c137-08d6bd20370b
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Apr 2019 19:18:57.8043 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR11MB1693
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.23, xch-aln-013.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/HZ8kZxr6noxLLpiuR59SCkD03bk>
Subject: Re: [netconf] reporting-level enum value
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, 09 Apr 2019 19:19:05 -0000

“minimal” seems appropriate to me.

Cheers,
Charles

From: netconf <netconf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
Date: Saturday, April 6, 2019 at 2:03 PM
To: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Subject: [netconf] reporting-level enum value


The zerotouch draft is in AUTH48 and one thing came up...

In Section 7.3, in the RPC-reply for the `get-boostrapping-data` RPC, there is a leaf called `reporting-level`:

         "Specifies the reporting level for progress reports the
           bootstrap server would like to receive when processing
           onboarding information.

With current values "standard" and "verbose".

The question to the WG is, would it be in anyway better to NOT use the word "standard"?
Perhaps it should be "minimal", “default”, “mandatory”, or “required” instead?
Thoughts?

Kent