IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-12

"Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com> Fri, 08 June 2018 14:57 UTC

Return-Path: <evoit@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 108B0130EDF for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 07:57:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, 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
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 xJlHpagn_34t for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 07:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85EBB130EE2 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 07:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1172; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1528469823; x=1529679423; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=VnOWpXuUyEKHB4DxaPRGbrxg74rMcdeOQ4fOGltKTMI=; b=In2klnJyFHY4TmBoRFVv2d9uvmL7ud+oKcugeQWGGQ22uWXwXp7jEIdi 8ZdskFRK1sr6tGxk2UuCrzPXhHn8pL7UjMcfthTEAyUZCtkd/d5nwCPp+ 2T114FgHYwKe6fkGMYbGkkkji/sdgHzRDEDTKnjYODN4e0imuk+zReoI9 g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DQAQDllxpb/5BdJa1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYNDgWEymFmBfpRSgXgLhGwCgkwhNRcBAgEBAQEBAQJtKIUoAQEBAwE6PQIFCwIBCA4HEBEQMiUCBAENDYUTCKwAiEaBaIhDgVQ/hBuKSAKMNIxHCQKOYYFGi2qHaokcAhETAYEkHgE2gVJwFYJ/kE6RDoEZAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,490,1520899200"; d="scan'208";a="126371261"
Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jun 2018 14:57:02 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (xch-rtp-014.cisco.com [64.101.220.154]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w58Ev2Sw028840 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:57:02 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) by XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (64.101.220.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:57:02 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:57:01 -0400
From: "Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, "alex@clemm.org" <alex@clemm.org>
CC: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-12
Thread-Index: AQHT/nTB7wTodISdV0qlE/sux4czBKRU8kawgAFinID///zC4IAAXMiA//++zTA=
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 14:57:01 +0000
Message-ID: <acfc0df721cb475d9b1c829d1f7f5dd7@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com>
References: <381e3937e0054984812ea69de97c7659@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <20180608.110205.217184993423575402.mbj@tail-f.com> <9f987f8f571e4a499c589f4be02c0407@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <20180608.162233.994500338881044294.mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180608.162233.994500338881044294.mbj@tail-f.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.118.56.228]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/Ip3cQdZTMYnoP1M_PdXMnABgCgI>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-12
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 14:57:06 -0000

> From: Martin Bjorklund, June 8, 2018 10:23 AM
> 
<snip>
> But the name of the leaf doesn't change the semantics.  The description says
> "number of event records", so your casual user still have to understand that a
> YANG Push notif is an event record.
> 
> BTW, it is not clear from the YANG push document that a YANG push notif
> really is an event record.  It uses the term "update record", and use the term
> "event record" in just one place.  This term should be imported from
> Subscribed-notifications, and used.

Update record has additional constraints.  Probably the way to handle this is to tweak the definition of update record in YANG push to the following:

"Update record: An event record which contains a representation of one or more datastore node updates.  In addition, an update record may contain which type of  update led to the datastore node update (e.g., whether the datastore node was added, changed, deleted).  Also included in the  update record may be other metadata, such as a subscription identifier of the subscription as part of which the update record was generated."

Eric

> /martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email