Re: [netconf] Adoption-suitability for draft-wang-netconf-adaptive-subscription

On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 6:40 PM duzongpeng@foxmail.com <
duzongpeng@foxmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Andy
>
>     I am interested in the mechinism, too.
>     The mechenism can be seen as a more intelligent negociation between
> the server and the client.
>
>
The draft describes some use-cases for an "ECA Framework".
The challenge is how to move client programming logic to the server in a
workable solution.
Simplistic solutions that allow 1 counter to be checked, etc. are not good
enough.
Robust solutions that are simple enough to be useful are hard to design and
standardize.

Obviously the client can poll the server and issue a <modify-subscription>
or <edit-config> to change the push parameters, then change the parameters
back
again when the special mode is no longer needed. If the network is up, and
not too busy,
and the latency does not cause events to be missed.

IMO, only a generalized ECA solution makes business sense, because it is
too complex
to duplicate over and over in ad-hoc ways for each point solution.

Best Regards
> Zongpeng Du
>
>

Andy

> ------------------------------
> duzongpeng@foxmail.com & duzongpeng@chinamobile.com
>
>
> *From:* Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
> *Date:* 2020-08-11 03:39
> *To:* Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
> *CC:* netconf@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [netconf] Adoption-suitability for
> draft-wang-netconf-adaptive-subscription
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to understand the problem statement in this draft.
> It appears to propose a complex self-monitoring system so that YANG Push
> subscriptions can change their parameters on the fly to adapt to
> changing network conditions. E.g. lower the 'period' parameter when
> conditions are right, to produce more push-update records than normal.
>
> The problem is somewhat interesting.
> The filtering mechanisms in YANG Push are really awful and there is a need
> to improve both filter and trigger mechanisms.  I don't think this draft
> offers
> a reasonable solution, but I encourage further experimentation.
> Prove it works in real products then maybe it will be ready for
> standardization.
>
>
> Andy
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 3:18 PM Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> wrote:
>
>> NETCONF WG,
>>
>> Per the previous email sent moments ago, the chairs would like to solicit
>> input on the following draft:
>>
>>    Title: Adaptive Subscription to YANG Notification
>>    Link:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wang-netconf-adaptive-subscription
>>    Abstract:
>>
>>       This document defines a YANG data model and associated mechanism
>>       enabling subscriber's adaptive subscriptions to a publisher's event
>>       streams at various different period intervals with which to report
>>       updates.  Applying these elements allows both subscriber and
>>       publisher to automatically adjust the volume of telemetry traffic
>>       sent from publisher to the receivers.
>>
>>
>> In particular, please discuss adoption-suitability as it regards to the
>> following questions:
>>
>>     1) is the problem important for the NETCONF WG to solve?
>>     2) is the draft a suitable basis for the work?
>>
>>
>> PS: this message is itself not an adoption poll, but rather an attempt to
>> gauge interest/support for a potential future adoption poll.
>>
>> NETCONF Chairs
>> _______________________________________________
>> netconf mailing list
>> netconf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>>
>