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

Two quick replies inline, <ALEX>
--- Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Netconf [mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 3:45 PM
> To: Eric Voit (evoit) <evoit@cisco.com>; Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>;
> alex@clemm.org
> Cc: netconf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-
> 12
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >> Sure, but can YP import the "Event Record" term from SN?
> >>
> >> Sure.  It imports other terms.  Alex, do you want to bring it in?
> >>

<ALEX> Why should we bring it into YP?  We basically don't use the term there.  We use "update record" (which we do define).  </ALEX>

> >> Also, I think that the definition could be improved.  It currently reads:
> >>
> >>    Event record: A set of information detailing an event.
> >
> > Yes.  But the word 'event' here is itself defined as:
> >
> >   Event: An occurrence of something that may be of interest.  Examples
> >   include a configuration change, a fault, a change in status, crossing
> >   a threshold, or an external input to the system.
> >
> >Reviewers have liked separation of the event itself from the record about it.
> 
> 
> I'm okay with separation.  On one hand, it seems like common English, but it
> might be good to have it well-defined in this draft.  Still it seems that the
> definition could be improved, maybe by contrasting it to an event?
> One is the what happened, the other a record about what happened...
> 

<ALEX> The separation makes sense and I think is something we always had in mind.  I am not clear what is needed.  We currently have "event record", which is distinguished from the "event" itself, and the "notification message", in addition to "event stream".  (We could rename "notification message" to "event notification message", which woudl become rather lengthy; we did not call it "event message" since there might be notification messages that notify of updates, which are different from events.)  
In short, I am not convinced that any changes are needed; I do think we have captured the right terms; but of course if you would like to see alternative definition text please make a suggestion.  
</ALEX>

> Kent // contributor
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf