Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications-12
Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Wed, 13 June 2018 07:04 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 66CE1130EAC for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 00:04:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-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 h808eenH5heA for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 00:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DACD130EEC for <netconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 00:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (h-80-27.A165.priv.bahnhof.se [212.85.80.27]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9B0E01AE027A; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:04:21 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:04:21 +0200
Message-Id: <20180613.090421.188030980179358538.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: alexander.clemm@huawei.com
Cc: kwatsen@juniper.net, evoit@cisco.com, alex@clemm.org, netconf@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <644DA50AFA8C314EA9BDDAC83BD38A2E0EB17F84@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <b44492127969401f8b72f2e3dd67d58e@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <4A685312-E065-4DF6-9BB1-BCC52947F1CA@juniper.net> <644DA50AFA8C314EA9BDDAC83BD38A2E0EB17F84@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / 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/dHlC6cJ0hwwQvJ5OBCqoaE_YXrI>
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: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:04:31 -0000
Alexander Clemm <alexander.clemm@huawei.com> wrote: > Two quick replies inline, <ALEX> > --- Alex > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Netconf [mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen > > Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 3:45 PM > > To: Eric Voit (evoit) <evoit@cisco.com>; Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>; > > alex@clemm.org > > Cc: netconf@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications- > > 12 > > > > > > > > > > >> Sure, but can YP import the "Event Record" term from SN? > > >> > > >> Sure. It imports other terms. Alex, do you want to bring it in? > > >> > > <ALEX> Why should we bring it into YP? We basically don't use the > term there. We use "update record" (which we do define). </ALEX> Alex, see the previous emails in this thread for context. The initial problem was the counter "pushed-notifications" in subscribed-notifications. Eric suggested to rename it and describe it as: leaf count-sent { type yang:counter64; 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."; The question is what this leaf really counts. Does it count the number of <notification> messages sent? The number of "event records"? Does it include "update records"? (Does this change if we have a mechanism to bundle several event records into a single <notification> message, as has been proposed?) > > >> Also, I think that the definition could be improved. It currently reads: > > >> > > >> Event record: A set of information detailing an event. > > > > > > Yes. But the word 'event' here is itself defined as: > > > > > > Event: An occurrence of something that may be of interest. Examples > > > include a configuration change, a fault, a change in status, crossing > > > a threshold, or an external input to the system. > > > > > >Reviewers have liked separation of the event itself from the record about it. > > > > > > I'm okay with separation. On one hand, it seems like common English, but it > > might be good to have it well-defined in this draft. Still it seems that the > > definition could be improved, maybe by contrasting it to an event? > > One is the what happened, the other a record about what happened... > > > > <ALEX> The separation makes sense and I think is something we always > had in mind. I am not clear what is needed. We currently have > "event record", which is distinguished from the "event" itself, and > the "notification message", in addition to "event stream". (We > could rename "notification message" to "event notification message", > which woudl become rather lengthy; we did not call it "event > message" since there might be notification messages that notify of > updates, which are different from events.) > In short, I am not convinced that any changes are needed; I do think > we have captured the right terms; but of course if you would like to > see alternative definition text please make a suggestion. As Juergen noted you have "event record" and "notification message" defined as new terms in subscribed-notifications. It is not clear how this relates to YANG's "notification" statement and RFC 6241/5277 <notification> message. I *think* that YANG's "notification" statement defines an "event record", and that your term "notification message" is the same as 6241/5277 "notification" (message). Also, I think that an "update record" is represented as one of "push-update" and "push-change-update" YANG notifications. So aren't these "event records"? I.e., an "update record" is a special case of an "event record"? /martin
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Alexander Clemm
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Kent Watsen
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Andy Bierman
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Kent Watsen
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Kent Watsen
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Henk Birkholz
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Alexander Clemm
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Alexander Clemm
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Kent Watsen
- [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subscrib… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-subs… Eric Voit (evoit)