Re: [netconf] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-22: (with COMMENT)

"Alexander Clemm" <> Tue, 30 April 2019 16:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CA53120193; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 09:33:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oLmxjHKpeiuv; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 09:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24F1E120092; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 09:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LAPTOPR7T053C2 ([]) by (mreueus002 []) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LniZN-1gqYWT3Lp9-00hrYO; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:33:31 +0200
From: "Alexander Clemm" <>
To: "'Eric Vyncke \(evyncke\)'" <>, "'The IESG'" <>
Cc: <>, <>, <>, <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 09:33:29 -0700
Message-ID: <03ed01d4ff72$730837a0$5918a6e0$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQKKqKE9+S3wnTB+qiITRsADDzqY4wGaVvVypNy9Y8A=
Content-Language: en-us
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:mMD4c4IlJb0rPoNP9fbrKcsndPW4pEwCo48zIVEmXUHHIAWEcbw n7GtJhKQch3etvstdrHRdkdkpex6Wp6F/aZ21Tb0G2PBXjtGaMdER+17gOzHmbUWb0jPQRm hf3q5sL5wjim9snIQYG/iPqlOZfBeZXDFVPwsWJgnVkRlIcSmVTIUlEBo/as8gKuAcytPFm BkR2BMxE40fJZrwoPENYA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:/T/WNPFUL58=:cahi4kvPsrrrsI6jR++P0y vH8H4P/4jjoKwe03tUGHCL3a2VhvLYP93el9x76rjP0aVoektpBMGdfF0WBOy48SSA2hl8tKb 98NYgHJFahSP/BdK1Cmk3pjeH4M1+otX8I9+CijPZznyHkxiK9mrdT1PePiTeD9XQQ7OG5dC2 PfdIIhkhgdnIOqomCZm9xgeeHrEPxGhlZLTKuFkNpvh8wI25kpLlgki9k4x+h4/v0+FQ9dZNG /LENOYeO9auKVpWSrHkCssifzxZs5vX13NeLkka2wQCWQQTbyIXZy8pHgOypBMrrREdC3djsD Pa1TeGhAHzcJGZtatOa9IPQUjZChGnCATRnPY5evEkZfiWePHFSXHbfle6lvsXd94pp8tGxBx fPpCGRMm0J0/NNNcHF72ZlEr00GE0F7CqkKTz4lWNbjcHJxHZjn+wH5g41g3Aii3oLnC59qne ZkDMFkDW3iVYZBLLIXaPKuhQlR9swH38SYz3+HbrbAv1Xt1w/Qre19IP/YuN6FzRzQCNTbL1P Rqwj5DWhYsFVfJxJbtPHMS8kmCdmahtaOgQ8U0lJu7fuzt6E1eZY5xVnFZTlDelVFYoWm3BmE cCvVmNV505n01a23AUK549SPe5eWwyCUm+evfYYNpL14oOhFFx9bRqML3exxHsatB1yblng8O 8COiZhhQxKLygREzuFT/Ku3Zu7oEEEfbllc5Ma4bFU2loa9NzqidHI4YY2xI0spIJc0ZXqPj3 GZ8Y3KFYv7Zsm/7/DOczELzLOAQYMlUyP/9/a4YqprlTWJO4e2OheLcfiqg=
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netconf] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-i?= =?utf-8?q?etf-netconf-yang-push-22=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:33:36 -0000

Hello Eric,

Thank you for your review!  Replies inline, <ALEX>

--- Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <> 
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 6:21 AM
To: The IESG <>
Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-22: (with COMMENT)

Please ignore my comment C3, my bad...


On 29/04/2019, 15:12, "iesg on behalf of Éric Vyncke via Datatracker" < on behalf of> wrote:

    Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
    draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-22: No Objection
    When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
    email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
    introductory paragraph, however.)
    Please refer to
    for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
    The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
    Getting a streaming telemetry for changes in datastore appears quite useful.
    Please note that I did not review in depth after the section 4.
    C1) Out of curiosity, it is surprising for a netconf wg document to have 7
    errors indicated by the YANG validator. Are they real errors or is the `pyang`
    validator incorrect or missing references?

<ALEX> There is a bug in the validator, which has been encountered for a while and which Eric can explain.  
    C2) 7 authors... the limit is usually 5 authors max. Can you justify?
<ALEX> All of the authors have made substantial contributions to the document over the span of several years.  We do believe this is justified and can provide further explanation of each individual author's contributions if needed.  

    C3) section 2. It should be RFC 8174 without citing RFC 2119.
    C4) section 3.7, why not forcing a resynch (and a patch-id of 0) rather than
    simply rolling explicitly the patch-id to 0. The latter seems to me as prone to
    synchronization errors.
<ALEX> We don't believe synchronization errors due to this scenario are an issue.  Note that the rolling back to 0 occurs only once every 4294967295 updates, if no resynch ever occurred prior.  If an application were ever concerned with loss of synchronization, it could also simply request one manually (as opposed to being forced to, which would appear more disruptive than the proposed solution).  

    N1) unsure why all Cisco Systems authors are not grouped together
<ALEX> Over the course of the document, some author affiliations have changed
    N2) "Xpath": should be described (or having a reference) before first use in
    section 3.6
<ALEX> Added the following brief explanation at the first occurrence:  "(XPath is a query language for selecting nodes in an XML document.) " 
    N3) a couple of "yang" in lowercase while I believe "YANG" is always written in
<ALEX> Updated many of those, except where used e.g. in file names. </ALEX>