[netconf] Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-trace-ctx-extension-01

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Thu, 31 October 2024 04:17 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
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 C8D8CC14F6EA; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 21:17:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gy_h4DlGJFYL; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 21:17:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1036.google.com (mail-pj1-x1036.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1036]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20C65C14F6AD; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 21:17:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1036.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2e2dcf4b153so395854a91.1; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 21:17:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1730348275; x=1730953075; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7IXdUjrYryGoE38Kghb69jxTKrnYrHbqmzFvwmMsZII=; b=QKTOYKv6P3mEVB/lbRlxPw/G/Ka5nWbZavxikS2YnWba5Ar1mWpeyBw1wJhYG606Ec p4bPigT9TCdDy0BO70NOZLTjlLONprj0Gzb3Uvx27PxVnBdlJP/pxmkgasn9W+kB3c5m 0ckg5DerKV/PSEFlwVKr53T9v/G2FQshsX6xLpo85/Gbj7hJqDkvvNFbleKMv1fRZHD6 8l8daCiTazZY7lCWY9unFB/Jbh4hllgrEerxI5Q7Bge0RK6CGbL58S/cYbZivfGp4XuH yWR0uTKlyG2IajOh4NqqIMQCcdKftCdRk8qVGQ3Q2cQEF/c8oHSnqvVvOMBubeEe9Kn1 6Flw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730348275; x=1730953075; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=7IXdUjrYryGoE38Kghb69jxTKrnYrHbqmzFvwmMsZII=; b=IHAFlB9n0oqd2E2TcwOprKG46Pv8AawODPvyFkj96iIXB4YdTnhD0HPBqd5y4juGri n/DYeqtjH2VYcdBWvucUoMXl9vfDoQnnSDY/lEM0ih5bjCjemfIWHrI2qIuDOrHAV8S9 pb6KZi4uFcaVxMZwQk3V1MZXzSjwvf/7tOeFYXf3hvgK0p2RWF+WgiUTGJJBv+R9/zGg 5vMudCPgXiPNJ1A9Dk8xsGTcVQDaXCbrcuphgjOQUgdTFE61/uyNzQpWvBxwI47l/tx1 oZLT0Z6F3Ah7QMB/WBCyePpBWDYBYV0pSp4emRGuHv6sjO/qK+Rbgi56mRgGTY8c4sVk 4HEA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV4dqMDoe6n1vE+jb9tBb0asnG/W7UVQ97ng3CBR2HFpwFinCMLW0PhEnAupsG/25ulCLv+qgQaKw==@ietf.org, AJvYcCVn8FtM6kgOOYcF/33ILFOCkEg4eA23fZg5wZe0QuS8ln2LpiMIt9WznTKutGUe7HkiQdl5zvA349xu@ietf.org, AJvYcCW04QUTrfRsvSj6nlTodZBrBeDl4rBIB/h+RXEZyO8mysvdGqzhuAWHuyRsufSOlDul3o8M7VcNQg==@ietf.org, AJvYcCXu2m29gbDon02xnvAfB0bN6AgOTYVV0SvNndPTjlQ9cvijrRkXoXgQWbVROeaNKuPeYuEJdcmTKUpsLnVtdapSOcICJAvs0bwjVtRSt5pcjSkWUmtJxpEGpZI=@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx38gdcTqQ5XVxCwtfpwzy0ehil0qecsCDdjpWn1O2A55RApYLf lEiB/+gCNhPjizRNOV1MwHr8K7cxli1oKyKmtH+k4aQhGSXxFboEpMonJwocquOGLVHT2D9mI0t AnjsZr/+z5lry8bgZe3mDxjahWzx4+w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFb4d+Bd492zZ70uS32BPImp2T3fQrMqz9pWaSq1QGbqTOdK+LYiW3zMaOuusqPZrSEyiPerG/p23u6QOgUwf4=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1e50:b0:2e0:74c9:ecf1 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2e92ce4e833mr6316710a91.10.1730348275346; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 21:17:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <173009941080.317154.1949281531203590277@dt-datatracker-6cdf944fd9-dld6h> <7EAB75E6-BCBB-4FCF-950B-26AE069DB827@gmail.com> <ACD269B2-8198-4C3E-A7A6-82D72C1800F6@dev.terastrm.net>
In-Reply-To: <ACD269B2-8198-4C3E-A7A6-82D72C1800F6@dev.terastrm.net>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 00:17:44 -0400
Message-ID: <CABNhwV2iyMfntvtevejQ=kfSVWpTzhpHTv3aYArpS4fZQz+GYQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kristian Larsson <kll@dev.terastrm.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004a36540625be1abb"
Message-ID-Hash: 63N322ZOS4QV5UT4HT7IRBQSOH4Z43OA
X-Message-ID-Hash: 63N322ZOS4QV5UT4HT7IRBQSOH4Z43OA
X-MailFrom: hayabusagsm@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-netconf.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: ops-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-netconf-trace-ctx-extension.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, NETCONF WG <netconf@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [netconf] Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-trace-ctx-extension-01
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <netconf.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/TAI4aRSUSfcvhVxiweN1yOXjk_Q>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:netconf-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:netconf-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:netconf-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Kristian

Thanks for the explanation.

I don’t think we need to respin the draft.

After reading the text again both the old and new are close to the same so
I am good with progressing the draft.

Thank you

Gyan



On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 9:51 PM Kristian Larsson <kll@dev.terastrm.net>
wrote:

> Hi Gyan,
>
> thanks Mahesh for the explanation, it’s exactly right. We don’t update the
> HTTP spec at all, we borrow its concepts and apply them to netconf. The w3c
> trace context headers are sent as XML attributes for NETCONF.
>
> I don’t understand the minor issue you list Gyan. What about port 830,
> SOAP 832 & 833? Regardless if NETCONF is over SSH, TLS, SOAP (in turn over
> BEEP or HTTPS), it still sends XML encoded RPCs and the trace context XML
> attributes are encoded in there. I don’t think we need to explicitly
> mention or deal with the details of the lower layer transports!?
>
> The abstract changes read very similarly to me, do you really think this
> warrants another spin at this point?
>
> Kind regards,
>    Kristian.
>
>
> > On 29 Oct 2024, at 19:30, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > [Speaking as a contributor]
> >
> > Hi Gyan,
> >
> >> On Oct 28, 2024, at 12:10 AM, Gyan Mishra via Datatracker <
> noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Reviewer: Gyan Mishra
> >> Review result: Not Ready
> >>
> >> Summary:
> >> This document defines how to propagate trace context information across
> the
> >> Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), that enables distributed
> tracing
> >> scenarios. It is an adaption of the HTTP-based W3C specification.
> >>
> >> I reviewed draft revision -01 and the draft is almost ready for
> publication but
> >> has some minor issue below.
> >>
> >> Major issue:
> >> None
> >>
> >> Minor issues:
> >>
> >> Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) uses the Secure Shell (SSH)
> transport
> >> layer as its default mechanism using default port 830, SOAP port 833 or
> HTTP
> >> port 832.
> >>
> >> Abstract recommended change
> >> Old:
> >>
> >> This document defines how to propagate trace context information across
> the
> >> Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), that enables distributed
> tracing
> >> scenarios. It is an adaption of the HTTP-based W3C specification.¶
> >>
> >> New:
> >>
> >> This document defines how to propagate trace context information using
> Network
> >> Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) push in order to enable distributed
> tracing
> >> scenarios. It is an adaption of the HTTP-based W3C specification.
> >>
> >> W3C owns the HTTP specification so how is this draft changing the W3C
> http
> >> specification?
> >>
> >> Netconf can use http but it’s not changing the http specification
> correct ?
> >>
> >> In the introduction see this paragraph
> >>
> >> The W3C has defined two HTTP headers for context propagation that are
> useful in
> >> use case scenarios of distributed systems like the ones defined in
> [RFC8309].
> >> This document defines an extension to the NETCONF protocol to add the
> same
> >> concepts and enable trace context propagation over NETCONF.
> >>
> >> So we are defining an extension to Netconf protocols in section 2
> related to
> >> W3Cs HTTP specification so in that way is this draft actually updating
> HTTP
> >> specification as well for the two new header types?
> >
> > I do not think the document is updating the HTTP specification. All it
> says that the <rpc> operation in NETCONF uses the HTTP like symantics to
> send information to the other end. For example:
> >
> > <rpc xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0" message-id="1"
> >     xmlns:w3ctc="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:w3ctc:1.0"
> >     w3ctc:traceparent=
> >       "00-4bf92f3577b34da6a3ce929d0e0e4736-00f067aa0ba902b7-01">
> >  <get-config/>
> > </rpc>
> >
> > The above operation is a NETCONF operation. It is using HTTP like trace
> context header format [1], but in no way is changing the HTTP protocol. HTH.
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> >>
> >> Nits:
> >> None
> >
> > [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/trace-context/
> >
> > Mahesh Jethanandani
> > mjethanandani@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
>
>