[netconf] Re: draft-ietf-netconf-privcand private candidate | <compare> on private-candidate(s)

["James Cumming (Nokia)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dylan,

I don’t think the proposed wording is correct.  It implies (at least to me) that you could compare between the last update point of the private candidate and the initial creation point of the private candidate (and not involve the current point of the private candidate at all).  This was not the intention of the original wording.

I’ve added the RFC into the text for the upcoming -05 as you suggest.

Thanks

James


From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, 30 July 2024 at 08:01
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: draft-ietf-netconf-privcand private candidate | <compare> on private-candidate(s)

Hello



Quoting 4.5:



"A <compare> operation MAY be performed against:

  1.  The initial creation point of the private candidate's branch
  2.  Against the last update point of the private candidate's branch
  3.  Against the running configuration"



This phrasing seems a bit obscure to me... If these are 3 different points of comparison, wouldn't it be simpler rephrased as:



"A <compare> [RFC9144<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-netconf-privcand-03.html#RFC9144>] operation MAY be performed against two of:

  1.  The initial creation point of the private candidate's branch
  2.  The last update point of the private candidate's branch
  3.  The running configuration"



NB: I added the reference to RFC9144 as well.



Best regards,
Dylan Sadoun
Orange Restricted