Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-12

"Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com> Fri, 08 June 2018 13:16 UTC

Return-Path: <evoit@cisco.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 66BF9130E5A for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 06:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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_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 WBAeJUu4UYvH for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 06:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57C61130EA7 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 06:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5150; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1528463808; x=1529673408; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=/UwFqIeTnOSq9FyUW0+pGAnvTO703BVrglI8c0tWsco=; b=Ki/bkhNi44eM4X1UY3BbXg1SKclyateMBdu1VEP7wOi8mwVL54oPoU3Y g+AMuQG6TkI/EMJbO/ZeH1TsIwg8+1UV8ZpkdQTuh03oZrnxQhx1Gbp2o c+lXrYSJmFkrUM8meTSkPLD0u+CI65jojJRo0B7Ea9wFaj9mIl5Vc/CeE I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0C1AQCAgBpb/5pdJa1UCRkBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQEHAQEBAQGDQ2J/KAqYWYF+lFIUgWQLGA2EAUYCgkwhNhYBAgEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQJtHAyFKAEBAQMBAQE4NAkCBQsCAQgOBwMNERAnCyUCBA4FCIMcgXcID6s?= =?us-ascii?q?miEaBYwWBEYcygVQ/gQ+DDIMRAQGBNhKFbQKRL4dMCQKFa4h2gUaGYIUKh2q?= =?us-ascii?q?CHIcAAhETAYEkJAEwgVJwFTuCQ4V8hRSFPm+QF4EZAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,490,1520899200"; d="scan'208";a="410779885"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jun 2018 13:16:47 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (xch-rtp-013.cisco.com [64.101.220.153]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w58DGlAT022927 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Jun 2018 13:16:47 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 09:16:46 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 09:16:46 -0400
From: "Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
CC: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-12
Thread-Index: AQHT/nTB7wTodISdV0qlE/sux4czBKRU8kawgAFinID///zC4A==
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 13:16:46 +0000
Message-ID: <9f987f8f571e4a499c589f4be02c0407@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com>
References: <20180607.173213.944977899308364449.mbj@tail-f.com> <381e3937e0054984812ea69de97c7659@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <20180608.110205.217184993423575402.mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180608.110205.217184993423575402.mbj@tail-f.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.118.56.228]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/Za5KKWvVuobXSo6eKe76h0dh3To>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-12
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 13:16:56 -0000

Updated version at:
https://github.com/netconf-wg/rfc5277bis/blob/master/draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-13.txt 

> From: Martin Bjorklund, June 8, 2018 5:02 AM
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> "Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com> wrote:
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> > Updated file at:
> > https://github.com/netconf-wg/rfc5277bis/blob/master/draft-ietf-netcon
> > f-subscribed-notifications-13.txt
> >
> > > From: Martin Bjorklund, June 7, 2018 11:32 AM
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > o  Section 2.3
> > >
> > >   s/"QoS" feature/"qos" feature/  (twice)
> 
> You forgot this one.  The feature in the YANG model is "qos", not "QoS".

Change made.

> > > o  Section 4
> > >
> > >   You have:
> > >
> > >           leaf pushed-notifications {
> > >             type yang:counter64;
> > >             config false;
> > >             description
> > >               "Operational data which provides the number of update
> > >                notification messages pushed to a receiver.";
> > >           }
> > >
> > >   Is this a left-over from previous versions?  This document doesn't
> > >   define YANG push, and it doesn't define the term "update
> > >   notification message".
> > >
> > >   Should it simply be notifications-sent, with description "A count of
> > >   the number of notifications sent to the receiver."?
> >
> > Text wasn't left over.   But to make it as clean as possible, I changed to:
> >
> >           leaf count-sent {
> >             type yang:counter64;
> 
> You may want to use yang:zero-based-counter64.

Change made
 
> >             config false;
> >             description
> >               "The number of event records sent to the receiver.  The
> >               count is initialized when a dynamic subscription is
> >               established, or when a configured subscription
> >               transitions to the valid state.";
> >           }
> >           leaf count-excluded {
> >             type yang:counter64;
> 
> From the description below, you definately want yang:zero-based-counter64.

Change made

> >             config false;
> >             description
> >               "The number of event records explicitly removed either
> >               via an event stream filter or an access control filter so
> >               that they are not passed to a receiver.  This count is
> >               set to zero each time 'count-sent' is initialized.";
> >           }
> 
> 
> Ok with this, but I would prefer more descriptive leaf names.
> event-records-sent and event-records-excluded perhaps.

Left it as "count-sent" and "count-excluded".  Reason is that the "count-sent" can be reused for yang-push notifications without casual users needing to read through all the descriptions to understand that a "push-update" notification is actually a form of event record.

> > > o  Section 4
> > >
> > >     leaf encoding  should have "if-feature configured;"
> > >
> > >     (it is dependent on ../transport, which has the if-feature)
> >
> > The encoding can be set by RPC, so the issue is with the constraint.
> > > (E.g., when HTTP is used, JSON and CBOR might be encodings.)
> >
> > Maybe the way to address this (as can be seen in the draft) is to
> > > enhance the constraint to:
> >
> > When  ' not(boolean(../transport))  or derived-from(../transport,
> "sn:configurable-encoding")'
> 
> You don't need the boolean(...):
> 
>   when 'not(../transport) or derived-from(...)';

Change made

Eric

> /martin
> 
> 
> 
> > And add an identity error to cover when an attempt is made establish a
> > subscription with an unsupported encoding:
> >
> >   identity encoding-not-supported {
> >     base establish-subscription-error;
> >     description
> >       "Unable to encode notification messages in the desired format.";
> >   }
> >
> >
> > >     Also, the description for this leaf is in -12:
> > >
> > >         "The type of encoding for the subscribed data. If not
> > >         included as part of the RPC, the encoding MUST be set by the
> > >         publisher to be the encoding used by this RPC.";
> > >
> > >    and in the not-yet-published -13 (from github):
> > >
> > >         "The type of encoding for the subscribed data.   If not
> > >         included, the encoding used will be the default for one
> > >         encoding expected with a transport.";
> > >
> > >    I can't parse from "the encoding used ...".
> >
> > Made it:
> >
> > "The type of encoding for notification messages.   For a dynamic subscription,
> if not included as part of an establish-subscription RPC, the encoding will be
> populated with the encoding used by that RPC.  For a configured subscription,
> if not explicitly configured the encoding with be the default encoding for an
> underlying transport.";
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Eric
> >
> > > /martin
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Netconf mailing list
> > > Netconf@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> >