[netconf] Re: YANG Push Lite presentation

BL <bl@ndt-inc.com> Mon, 11 November 2024 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <bl@ndt-inc.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 143ECC157927 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 06:58:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ndt-inc.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 ZK5IwSS7zdTH for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 06:57:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sender4-op-o15.zoho.com (sender4-op-o15.zoho.com [136.143.188.15]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D5C9C14F6A0 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 06:57:58 -0800 (PST)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1731337075; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=SeBhUAFWV4uGO1mYT0pG95uU+gOYoEkBOTiaJrtdDBkDO6xFWwWrKE/WEtDWHik9Wg4yFtgCxYM5fRogzb9DITy7yN4ESjO/noxC34tM5cwh6KuTq2b/dr+C+Xvu9Weig6H8M7Sm6KEiZaW8KSO1jQQCBkvkcONw/fXlQA2m9w8=
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1731337075; h=Content-Type:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:From:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=r2TGsYBA/2feM2jJwRGvWiYEWC7oKwpEin0C+K1Xw+Y=; b=Ecan6zOJCHljhY2+KQ7nrGGKDW9avwIyLlrwcgDDRi1+WOkp5HLVFx2Nnu3iG52WYySBhLrxMRi8Q3nGSWqMyc3sOGfqlqhjr3RbFD/BbI9m0w3YRYYi+/ZNPtjGIIz5uittnvmYa0pFh63sLAESLrCCoAaCPzJw1E6aKFJDRlI=
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=ndt-inc.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bl@ndt-inc.com; dmarc=pass header.from=<bl@ndt-inc.com>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1731337075; s=zoho; d=ndt-inc.com; i=bl@ndt-inc.com; h=Content-Type:Message-ID:Date:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:Subject:To:To:Cc:Cc:References:From:From:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=r2TGsYBA/2feM2jJwRGvWiYEWC7oKwpEin0C+K1Xw+Y=; b=O8yVdLEdrkU3+7QOCdHFE8UhdGVn20O77VTElvyy5SzmdbWRZvbU6YAUTkjNpwg2 S+1KlPGJES7z74Av6Qv4FEi+03jwz2Ek4zLAajUPvbv2NWIXcFlc8MO9TW+IS3V7JIE Bpebzc7L1khLUjBLhFe6Xoeb6/6Hbtf9hz8JrbLCXMoEUDCLSDEccp/AyLIMscBsZDw CQgLDR1y9G07SfQ3BoCi3rccPl/zsFUYRypEZq01jJ7tAScYGtszWAd+ZGyBd6J/x3I apAMc2KqGL+58QStkobRl2QcWQ+GoiHAUieFbLyeaB79mxcbHNKzjAGzwQ53TTsuEHw ++gqmnniSg==
Received: by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1731337072808785.6416908823887; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 06:57:52 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------OJqfm3E46RBrpA5KlJaiYylv"
Message-ID: <213ba25f-2c93-4e01-b372-949b641150de@ndt-inc.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 09:56:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
References: <CABCOCHTxV=wxAVkQBiGK1ounrP+CPpcvYyoGKVxWwsT5ybT4rg@mail.gmail.com> <926994226.132102.1731082639532@mail.yahoo.com> <CABCOCHQ4PWYUCcwCST25nPP=1G+KV7+HpWtagi3KoaMu9pneiA@mail.gmail.com> <f1fbbf8e-edac-4e0a-b1d9-6ee0fb13f801@ndt-inc.com> <CABCOCHS_9YkP5gTx8Ss2EK=LQHkok8Uxfvp1z2WZTeuQqjCQUg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: BL <bl@ndt-inc.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHS_9YkP5gTx8Ss2EK=LQHkok8Uxfvp1z2WZTeuQqjCQUg@mail.gmail.com>
X-ZohoMailClient: External
Message-ID-Hash: EVIRGXZNOEFHOVZXWPMJE3Q2SEI2SG2T
X-Message-ID-Hash: EVIRGXZNOEFHOVZXWPMJE3Q2SEI2SG2T
X-MailFrom: bl@ndt-inc.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: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [netconf] Re: YANG Push Lite presentation
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <netconf.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/_Pq9zQeL6wP541xFmHtzwe--lOY>
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>


On 11/8/2024 7:21 PM, Andy Bierman wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 4:01 PM BL <bl@ndt-inc.com> wrote:
>
>     Hi Andy,
>
>     dampening-period is for both the subscriber/client and the
>     publisher/server.
>     Server should implement
>     ietf-system-capabilities/ietf-notification-capabilities (or
>     similar model)
>     so the client can examine capabilities of the server before
>     subscribing.
>
>
> I am aware of that YANG module.
> My comment was about the slide that said that dampening should be 
> removed from YANG Push.
> This is the only standard way for an operator can limit the send rate 
> of each publisher.
> Seems kind of important for UDP.
>
>     You propose to remove "push-change-update" and use "push-update"
>     instead in "on-change" subscription.
>     Which sounds reasonable since "push-change-update" is complicated
>     to implement.
>     Could you clarify:
>     "Also agree that a push update is not a full replace, but rather
>     justgather what is being reported."
>
>
> The example in the meeting was a subscription for an entire datastore, 
> but consider a filter for /interfaces.
> If an update only contains  1 interface 
> (/interfaces/interface[name='foo']) that does not mean all the other 
> interfaces
> have been deleted.  This is not as precise as YANG Patch but much 
> easier to implement.

So this would be a "push-change-update" but in a different form, i.e. 
modified "push-update" ?
I don't see how this makes implementation easier.

>
> The push-update may need some enhancement to say "I really mean a full 
> replace this time".
>
>     Borislav
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>     On 11/8/2024 11:37 AM, Andy Bierman wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 8:17 AM Reshad Rahman <reshad@yahoo.com>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>         Hi Andy,
>>
>>         > I do not understand the issue with dampening.
>>         Within the implementation, it means how often you check for
>>         changes.
>>         It is effectively the same as the 'period' for a periodic
>>         subscription.
>>         How does an on-change subscription work without this parameter?
>>
>>         In the context of continuously changing data such as counters
>>         I understand the statement above. But for state changes,
>>         dampening-period isn't needed (although I realize this is
>>         implementation specific).
>>
>>
>>
>>     So it should be optional I guess.
>>     This parameter is for the subscriber, not the publisher.
>>     It means "do not send me an update more frequently than N
>>     centiseconds".
>>
>>
>>         Regards,
>>         Reshad.
>>
>>
>>     Andy
>>
>>         On Friday, November 8, 2024 at 11:08:24 AM EST, Andy Bierman
>>         <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>         Hi,
>>
>>         I hope this work gets high priority.
>>         There are many I-Ds already so please do not start over or
>>         greatly expand the scope.
>>         I have been saying that YANG Push is too complicated since I
>>         was on the DT
>>         that created RFC 8639,40,41.
>>
>>         We have a fairly complete implementation of dynamic
>>         subscriptions.
>>         Glad to see there is now consensus to get rid of the YANG
>>         Patch update.
>>         We decided the same thing a long time ago:
>>         https://docs.yumaworks.com/en/latest/cli/netconfd-pro.html#push-simop-patch-update
>>
>>         Also agree that a push update is not a full replace, but
>>         rather just
>>         gather what is being reported. That is also how our server works.
>>
>>         I do not understand the issue with dampening.
>>         Within the implementation, it means how often you check for
>>         changes.
>>         It is effectively the same as the 'period' for a periodic
>>         subscription.
>>         How does an on-change subscription work without this parameter?
>>
>>
>>         Andy
>>
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         netconf mailing list -- netconf@ietf.org
>>         To unsubscribe send an email to netconf-leave@ietf.org
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     netconf mailing list --netconf@ietf.org
>>     To unsubscribe send an email tonetconf-leave@ietf.org
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     netconf mailing list -- netconf@ietf.org
>     To unsubscribe send an email to netconf-leave@ietf.org
>