[Netconf] [Errata Verified] RFC8072 (5131)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 12 October 2017 07:57 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
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 93CBF133080; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 3yv1l0BDcTiW; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:57:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A6A1133200; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:57:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id C42CAB810A1; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:57:00 -0700 (PDT)
To: rwilton@cisco.com, andy@yumaworks.com, mbj@tail-f.com, kwatsen@juniper.net
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: bclaise@cisco.com, iesg@ietf.org, netconf@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20171012075700.C42CAB810A1@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:57:00 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/X-zwoQkyT0J1BKd1qHuAdIXuvpA>
Subject: [Netconf] [Errata Verified] RFC8072 (5131)
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing 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: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 07:57:17 -0000
The following errata report has been verified for RFC8072, "YANG Patch Media Type". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5131 -------------------------------------- Status: Verified Type: Technical Reported by: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> Date Reported: 2017-09-28 Verified by: Benoit Claise (IESG) Section: 2.2 Original Text ------------- Regarding section 2.2 of RFC 8072, the third paragraph states: ... If the edit does not identify any existing resource instance and the operation for the edit is not "create", then the request MUST NOT be processed and a "404 Not Found" error response MUST be sent by the server. Corrected Text -------------- ... If the edit does not identify any existing resource instance and the operation for the edit is "delete" or "move" then the request MUST NOT be processed and a "404 Not Found" error response MUST be sent by the server. Notes ----- As per the second paragraph of section 2.2 of RFC 8072, the operations are expected to mirror the semantics of the "operation" attribute described in Section 7.2 of [RFC6241]. The spec also doesn't specify what happens if it is a "create" operation and the resource already exists. It should probably also state that "400 Bad Request" is returned. -------------------------------------- RFC8072 (draft-ietf-netconf-yang-patch-14) -------------------------------------- Title : YANG Patch Media Type Publication Date : February 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] [Errata Verified] RFC8072 (5131) RFC Errata System