Re: [Netconf] subscribed-notifications-12

["t.petch" <[e-mail]>]

Eric

OK so far.

I am puzzled by the features for encoding.

I can see four cases for a publisher; no features, encode-xml and
encode-json, encode-xml only, encode-json only.

The first case seems clear; the stream uses the encoding of the
subscription.

The second also seems clear; the subscriber can choose either encoding.

The third and the fourth puzzle me.  If only encode-xml is present, and
the subscription is in xml, then the stream will be in xml, whether or
not the encoding is specified.  If the subscription is in json, and the
encoding is not specified, then the stream will be in json.  If the
subscription is in json and the encoding is specified as xml, then the
stream will be in xml.

If only encode-json is present, then it is vice versa, mutatis mutandis.

I find this an odd combination to specificy.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Voit (evoit)" <[e-mail]>
To: "t.petch" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 3:48 PM


> Hi Tom,
>
> Thanks for the review.  You can see the updated draft at:
>
https://github.com/netconf-wg/rfc5277bis/blob/master/draft-ietf-netconf-
subscribed-notifications-13.txt
>
> Some details inline...
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: t.petch, April 19, 2018 7:42 AM
> > To: Eric Voit (evoit) <[e-mail]>; Kent Watsen
<[e-mail]>;
> > Alexander Clemm <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
> > Subject: subscribed-notifications-12
> >
> > Eric
> >
> > I see some quirks in this I-D that I think need fixing
> >
> > It lacks a note to the RFC Editor asking that XXXX be replaced with
the number
> > assigned to the I-D
>
> Placed this at the front of the section leading in to the YANG model
>
> > It lacks a note to the RFC Editor asking that the two dates in the
YANG module
> > be replaced with the date of publication
>
> Placed this at the front of the section leading in to the YANG model
>
> > I see no Copyright in the YANG module
> >
> > The YANG module references
> >
> > 6991
> > 7223  (which is  superseded)
> > 7951
> > 7540
> > none of which I see in the References of the I-D
>
> Fixed.
>
> > Good practice is to have a section just before the YANG module
itself which
> > lists the documents from whiuch imports are made or to which
references are
> > made (if you simply add RFC6991 as a Reference, you will get an
unused
> > Reference error).  See, for example, RFC8344
>
> Done.
>
> > There are a number of Informative References which I think should be
> > Normative namely
> > 8040
>
> Done.  Agree this should be Normative based on the use of yang-data.
>
> > 5246
>
> Done.
>
> > 6241
>
> Done
>
> > 6242
>
> Done
>
> > 7950
>
> I believe this one is an informative reference.  I.e., the reference
in the YANG model is to an example of analogous behavior from HTTP2.  My
reading of rfc7950 section 7.21.4 doesn't seem to require a reference to
be normative.  If it does, I can move the information into the
description.
>
> Thanks again,
> Eric
>
>
> > Tom Petch
>
>