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

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> > I had always seen as subscribed-notifications as a control plane improvement to RFC-5277.
> 
> Let hope so  ;)
> 
> 
> 
> > Explicitly excluding XSD, SYSLOG, vendor structures, etc. seems unnecessary.   
> 
> XSD is another DML, maybe you meant XML?  
> 
> SYSLOG is a protocol, I think you mean to say that folks might encapsulate
> syslog messages inside a <notification> element.  This is fine, I suggest
> defining a notification called something like "syslog-message" that is
> essentially a leaf of type "string".
> 
> Vendor structures are like Syslog, they can be even be binary if the leaf
> is of type "binary".
> 
> I'm not trying to exclude anything, what gets excluded?

I agree with Kent.  5277 was pre-YANG, so it could not be tied to the
"notification" message.  Even 5277 could not transport any data - it
had to be encoded in XML.  This new draft is more flexible since it
can be used with XML and JSON (and other encodings) - *because* it
transports YANG notifications.

/martin

> > I can ping a few people who have legacy implementations which might
> > be closer to this than I.   Narrowing the scope in this way should
> > be broadly discussed.
> 
> But is it narrowing the scope any? (see above)
> 
> 
> 
> > > > It would be helpful to get some comments on draft-ietf-netconf-
> > > > notification-messages.
> > > > This draft address improvements to the opaque data blobs.
> > > 
> > > Perhaps tease us with a little more detail?  ;)
> >
> > Pretty much all the common headers in Section 3 and the message
> > bundling in Section 4 are both improvements which are relevant
> > to this thread. Tianran likely will have some new headers he
> > wants added as part of the multi-line card work.
> 
> I don't see the relation to opaque data here. The "notification-contents"
> description says "Encapsulates objects following YANG's notification-stmt
> grammar of RFC-7950 section 14."  That doesn't sound like it would be
> very opaque.
> 
> 
> Kent
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> 