Re: [netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8040 (5857)
Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Wed, 11 September 2019 10:44 UTC
Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
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 9C3A8120052 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 03:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.cz
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 zdVWpZOXlk9Q for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 03:44:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [217.31.204.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5552B1200EB for <netconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 03:44:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from birdie (unknown [IPv6:2001:1488:fffe:6:a88f:7eff:fed2:45f8]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6238B1414E6; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 12:44:40 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1568198680; bh=najN++bUkmRar4c4Q2Pd0dCk/+34hc2I/y7gxdb3iFE=; h=From:To:Date; b=T8C67yR6AJc3ap5LVYLV4nMSNyC7tX1LyQpxK/kzym2H6QXhdOs89DTFpBUPSUse9 RxBY46yEPugD2WCd7e12LMdYiKDb74n9YDEew8RiaMmyxiJgUL4f+ESsphw95rI4eT flf5Tw9GkPsd8v8IOvOY/B+DagftsveXcp1kG5aY=
Message-ID: <b499ba548cdbd66af5a4b2e43b9ad782f7a31aba.camel@nic.cz>
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, andy@yumaworks.com, mbj@tail-f.com, kwatsen@juniper.net, ibagdona@gmail.com, warren@kumari.net, kent+ietf@watsen.net, mjethanandani@gmail.com
Cc: netconf@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 12:44:40 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20190911033901.580B1B81207@rfc-editor.org>
References: <20190911033901.580B1B81207@rfc-editor.org>
Organization: CZ.NIC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.100.3 at mail.nic.cz
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/T9y2CxELL4gmvkbBischAUtnYMg>
Subject: Re: [netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8040 (5857)
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 10:44:47 -0000
Hi, this erratum should be rejected: "operations" is defined as a container in the ietf-restconf module, so according to RFC 7951 (sec. 5.2) it is represented as a name/object pair in JSON. Lada On Tue, 2019-09-10 at 20:39 -0700, RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8040, > "RESTCONF Protocol". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5857 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Qin WU <bill.wu@huawei.com> > > Section: 3.1 > > Original Text > ------------- > The server might respond as follows: > > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 20:56:30 GMT > Server: example-server > Cache-Control: no-cache > Last-Modified: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:00:14 GMT > Content-Type: application/yang-data+json > > { "operations" : { "example-jukebox:play" : [null] } } > > Corrected Text > -------------- > The server might respond as follows: > > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 20:56:30 GMT > Server: example-server > Cache-Control: no-cache > Last-Modified: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:00:14 GMT > Content-Type: application/yang-data+json > > { "operations" :[ { "example-jukebox:play" : [null] } ]} > > Notes > ----- > Returned operations in the RESTCONF response should be an array of the > particular type, therefore the brackets are needed to enclose a list of > operations associated with example-jukebox. > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC8040 (draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-18) > -------------------------------------- > Title : RESTCONF Protocol > Publication Date : January 2017 > Author(s) : A. Bierman, M. Bjorklund, K. Watsen > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Network Configuration > Area : Operations and Management > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > _______________________________________________ > netconf mailing list > netconf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
- [netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8040 (58… RFC Errata System
- Re: [netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8040… Ladislav Lhotka