Return-Path: 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 B6C7612D961 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 09:11:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 9xROgA_zLGeS for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 09:11:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 586EF12DA0A for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 09:11:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7614; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1527869506; x=1529079106; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to; bh=A49G1J1trY3RMP+3KnojvN9DNcNeqXuoqJg24T8Xxfg=; b=MTIh+FkXi75ixPSK+Y/H1kHJra6X2g/HBRLXr/sz6MMWgeCnLO5FByfv 8d2cQGVLmfHGYc8OCN6wBrxa6B+r1TWsXvEZX4m6pE4TITb/g8c9MAosU KRvfLAaqNVQxcTPjIZmSapCcqCW47aTqhWuRffURldw/8fB78/YGkGXtw s=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DfBQBrbxFb/wbLJq1cGQEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJOdWJ/KJhjgVApj1WGbwsYAQqEA0YCggUhOBQBAgEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQJsHAyFKQEBBAEBK0EbCxguJzAGAQwGAgEBgx4CgX8PqSkfhDmDaIFjBYg?= =?us-ascii?q?/gVQ/gTOCaYMRAQGHNAKRJYdHCY5bBoE8hjeFIodbhAqFNIFYIYFSMxoIGxU?= =?us-ascii?q?7gkOLEIU/PjCPagEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,467,1520899200"; d="scan'208,217";a="122967838" Received: from aer-core-1.cisco.com ([173.38.203.6]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Jun 2018 16:11:32 +0000 Received: from [10.63.23.83] (dhcp-ensft1-uk-vla370-10-63-23-83.cisco.com [10.63.23.83]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w51GBU5T013119; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 16:11:30 GMT To: Rohit R Ranade , "netconf@ietf.org" References: <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BBB3AC2@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> From: Robert Wilton Message-ID: <387e825e-d7b9-01c3-d457-c13b797b5bfc@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 17:11:30 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <991B70D8B4112A4699D5C00DDBBF878A6BBB3AC2@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------F19E722C0333333F9969A436" Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Netconf] [netconf] Editorial change for draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 16:11:50 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------F19E722C0333333F9969A436 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Rohit, I think that this is a useful clarification, but thinking about this further, I think that this can probably be stated more generally.  Hence, I'll merge the proposed update as part of my response to your " Editorial change-2 for draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf" thread. Thanks, Rob On 31/05/2018 09:54, Rohit R Ranade wrote: > > Change 1: > > ================ > > Section 3.1.1 > > OLD: > > The "config-filter" parameter can be used to retrieve only "config > >    true" or "config false" nodes. > > NEW: > > The "config-filter" parameter can be used to retrieve only "config > >    true" or "config false" nodes. Note that if “config-filter” is set > to “false”, > > configuration ancestors (if any) and list key leafs (if any) > > are also returned. > > Note: > > “retrieve only “config false” nodes maybe misleading. So the use-full > text written in RFC 8040 in Example 3 can be re-used here. > > With Regards, > > Rohit R Ranade > > > > _______________________________________________ > Netconf mailing list > Netconf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf --------------F19E722C0333333F9969A436 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi Rohit,

I think that this is a useful clarification, but thinking about this further, I think that this can probably be stated more generally.  Hence, I'll merge the proposed update as part of my response to your " Editorial change-2 for draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf" thread.

Thanks,
Rob


On 31/05/2018 09:54, Rohit R Ranade wrote:

Change 1:

================

Section 3.1.1

 

OLD:

The "config-filter" parameter can be used to retrieve only "config

   true" or "config false" nodes.

 

 

NEW:

The "config-filter" parameter can be used to retrieve only "config

   true" or "config false" nodes. Note that if “config-filter” is set to “false”,

configuration ancestors (if any) and list key leafs (if any)

are also returned. 

 

Note:

“retrieve only “config false” nodes maybe misleading. So the use-full text written in RFC 8040 in Example 3 can be re-used here.

 

 

With Regards,

Rohit R Ranade

 



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

--------------F19E722C0333333F9969A436--