Re: [Netconf] Inconsistency in Section 1.4 of draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-18

[Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail]>]

Andy Bierman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Kent Watsen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > "Mehmet Ersue" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > Dear NETCONF WG,
> > >
> > > RFC Editor found an inconsistency in Section 1.4 of
> > > draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-18, where paragraph 6 says:
> > >
> > >    "If the NETCONF server is expecting a
> > >    "persist-id" parameter to complete the confirmed commit procedure
> > >    then the RESTCONF edit operation MUST fail with a "409 Conflict"
> > >    status-line.  There error-tag "in-use" is returned in this case.  The
> > >    error-tag value "resource-denied" is used in this case."
> > >
> > > Myself as the document shepherd and the authors agreed to use the
> > error-tag
> > > value "invalid value" to align with the operations <cancel-commit> and
> > > <commit> in RFC 6241.
> > > The correction will be done as below:
> > >
> > > OLD:
> > >    There error-tag "in-use" is returned in this case.  The
> > >    error-tag value "resource-denied" is used in this case.
> > >
> > > NEW:
> > >       The error-tag value "invalid-value" is used in this case.
> > >
> > > Please speak up within 2 days if you have a strong objection.
> >
> > I don't think invalid-value is appropriate.  It signals that the
> > client provided an invalid value for some parameter, but that's not
> > true in this case - there is nothing the client can do in order to fix
> > the situation.  I prefer to use 'resource-denied' (which is actually
> > what Mehmet suggested).
> >
> >
> >
> > What do NETCONF servers return when no persist-id is passed even though
> > one is needed?  RFC 6241 isn’t clear.   RFC 6241 seems to only speak to
> > when the wrong persist-id is passed.  Either case, RESTCONF SHOULD return
> > the same error-tag value that a NETCONF server returns for these cases,
> > right?

Agreed, but as you note RFC 6241 is not clear on the topic.

> Our server returns 'in-use'

Our does that as well.


Actually, the description for in-use says:

   Description:    The request requires a resource that already is in
                   use.

which matches this case fairly well.

resource-denied means something else:

   Description:    Request could not be completed because of
                   insufficient resources.


So, in-use is probably better.


/martin