[netconf] Issue #1 Can binary be an added option to the encoding mechanism
Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> Wed, 15 January 2020 01:00 UTC
Return-Path: <mjethanandani@gmail.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 9DF1812002F for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:00:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 tTjBEO_97IwP for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:00:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42c.google.com (mail-pf1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45218120058 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:00:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id z16so7533305pfk.0 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:00:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:message-id:date :to; bh=8wCQXf0Tk7XB6Zx3IBK1/0wtB3FUsKhmXXcV31X+IFA=; b=DJDjmTiPR6OHHMG58fVAmpn/BiNJW/Ift/OK0lztf1AH7pbzkEBSZ0aRbGhRriktzu RAcRFY5GPQRuAZKUWZlIU+GTrgC73CbKZ9rpCK33028caxC/B/p3UNQZFVUczJMdEXO9 9DeY/qWKEy9UxGBmxb9gHOAveYZ5X9zUcCXhn51Bpf0RfqhSVCvUB171LCipCJfogSnM i1rJv7BoYU356hCpUXUkroLmvUOO+VZrk6c6DiO6zlnQH/T5gZRDL+NMxAyghw3TvqAV CZVlb2TzkuIjvpRsw5qkP8YCr69uJLBLV8BMEzyfJqg+vyEPAFmeCMip+WInL3GPqWMQ SEpQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:message-id:date:to; bh=8wCQXf0Tk7XB6Zx3IBK1/0wtB3FUsKhmXXcV31X+IFA=; b=rw8nfZjJg3Vp055xzp7X5kIvrZ4jj0SDU7zV7QRZSXQbXVJ65SlZOgzfIZX0Xs4OWK ZeXe2M/3MLviaIUiZQEFVL7oqa01UxnzOveO4pQfiz0g+/ZQfdOYd4uvJhosG3zdFRgu THNVlpEmC96DO3+hnviY6dTg+lxko43Te5w/zZv5hITCM6nR8f5TeqFxPOFShUAr2q6F d6DkrMa7KJI8iutyH8iVwDNQSkDOmPfJqqI54RKetfyuS+8VLN5MVjSA5sdodXxhk/gQ 1L4mmCc+fJ3Dr2fXvxNjF0WRambC5qchw/NU0oZR5Gb0k7UF9dVjdHmV401QH9olknbf u8EA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVX1kfCZfAKtCxSvzzOfi26AcQD+ebdXH4hZMyRZolUsXejyN4T ZEbt1c1W/qsXf0OWa+jP2sMZ3Dhw
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxgcvIpqJhKggTnIS+NB8GAziwkT6cXIljj5fpS2VJyOOwC83fhM+RxJWi45C6ZtjDdTW3LKw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:6fca:: with SMTP id k193mr31217947pgc.416.1579050052374; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:00:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.33.123.108] ([66.170.99.1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t63sm19633357pfb.70.2020.01.14.17.00.51 for <netconf@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:00:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Message-Id: <C82FBB08-7622-48FA-961A-3EE83F93F606@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:00:50 -0800
To: Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/KXUC3XixG-EyuU71Lo-PStH4Ndw>
Subject: [netconf] Issue #1 Can binary be an added option to the encoding mechanism
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: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 01:01:00 -0000
The above issue was opened on GitHub to track support for binary encoding of notifications in draft-ietf-netconf-https-notification draft. The question is how does a publisher learn of the receiver capabilities, including its ability to receive binary encoded notifications. The original suggestion was to use OPTIONS method in HTTP to learn receivers capability. It turns out that OPTIONS does not have a header that can be used for this purpose. Martin suggested using Accept-Post, but the IETF draft that suggested that header has expired, and we are not clear on the support for it. Therefore, the current proposal is to use GET with a specific Content-Type that returns metadata, i.e. an ordered set of encodings. Comments/Questions? Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanandani@gmail.com
- [netconf] Issue #1 Can binary be an added option … Mahesh Jethanandani