Re: [netconf] configuring multi-channels

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Tue, 17 September 2019 06:36 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.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 88CA7120098 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:36:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 gHloe_snP4Se for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:36:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7909C12008C for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:36:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.41]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D09171AE0115; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 08:35:57 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 08:35:33 +0200
Message-Id: <20190917.083533.892234744068366075.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: zhoutianran@huawei.com
Cc: kent+ietf@watsen.net, netconf@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F21BEFB6EDA@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F21BEFB6EDA@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 25.2 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/bUbWV9XKx6RIDouzFykL2P_m2S0>
Subject: Re: [netconf] configuring multi-channels
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG 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: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 06:36:03 -0000

Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> The channel is concept is from 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhou-netconf-multi-stream-originators/
> There are multiple publication channels per device/subscription.

In that document, the word "channel" is present three times + one
(broken) XML example.  The concept of a channel needs to be explained
in detail so that we can have a meaningful discussion.



/martin


> It should be better if the client is not aware of the
> channels. These can be achieved by using the UDP based publication
> channel as in:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-udp-pub-channel/
> The publishers can use the same IP as the subscription channel, and
> use dynamic ports. So no per channel configurations need.
> 
> For https-notif, we can consider to pre-configure all the
> possible/potential publication channels.
> But the usage of which
> channels is decided by the device dynamically during the run time.




> 
> Regards,
> Tianran
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:mbj@tail-f.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 3:27 AM
> > To: kent+ietf@watsen.net
> > Cc: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>; netconf@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [netconf] Adoption Call for
> > draft-mahesh-netconf-https-notif-00
> > 
> > Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Tianran,
> > >
> > >
> > > > Considering the multiple stream originator case, I would suggest this
> > https-notif to add a channel level configuration.
> > > > i.e.
> > > >
> > > > +--receivers
> > > >    +--receiver
> > > >       +--channels
> > > >          +--channel
> > > >             +--here put the http client server configurations
> > > >
> > > > This is compatible with the single originator case with only one channel
> > configuration.
> > >
> > > We can look at this.  Maybe use a choice statement between the two options...
> > 
> > I don't think this is a good idea.  But then I don't really understand the
> > 'channel' concept.  I don't understand why the client needs to be aware of
> > these channels, but this should probably be discussed in a separate thread.
> > 
> > 
> > /martin
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > Kent // co-author
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > If you do not like this, I think existing https-notif model also works.
> > > > i.e. each receiver configuration stands for one channel.
> > > > But this is not clear IMO.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Tianran
>