Re: [netconf] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-17

Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> Tue, 07 May 2019 21:49 UTC

Return-Path: <0100016a944613e1-766a1ada-f1a1-44a3-bced-4ed28baa8797-000000@amazonses.watsen.net>
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 520381200EB; Tue, 7 May 2019 14:49:45 -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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.com
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 1NZLesFMdBSr; Tue, 7 May 2019 14:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a8-32.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-32.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 381A6120086; Tue, 7 May 2019 14:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=6gbrjpgwjskckoa6a5zn6fwqkn67xbtw; d=amazonses.com; t=1557265781; h=From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:Feedback-ID; bh=BJj6538wbLJwCYzQThiiB19tcjwdgm/QGhFZOz9Lofk=; b=ENskTtUohbvx6HpYxqLfyvpv1Vzjel8g+L86qvg4HKGb6Z+PNsAJVK4FCcD8TKzS 0bZLu9YEq/uprXQ2EXxGgEnjET7josPqLpg8OGwGAuLCEc7+OFy/0agxvu2q2fcLeYZ L9Glw6uzdwD1Yhox26scI5wRq/JvKhMciCwDScmM=
From: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
Message-ID: <0100016a944613e1-766a1ada-f1a1-44a3-bced-4ed28baa8797-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0FE25B22-758E-4E55-B537-77E289AF4899"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
Date: Tue, 7 May 2019 21:49:41 +0000
In-Reply-To: <1cf686e76a314553842305bc97baeb3d@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com>
Cc: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications.all@ietf.org>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>, Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>, "<rtg-ads@ietf.org>" <rtg-ads@ietf.org>
To: "Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com>
References: <CAB75xn4HiqYqeWu2tiOsfDwU4ePc+-6ym+4EpowqZ-YMgkRRMA@mail.gmail.com> <7395d7e5db4b48e1ba582c9c48c29913@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com> <0100016a758d3dec-7b7a305f-30f6-4234-b66e-d48960cddef6-000000@email.amazonses.com> <1cf686e76a314553842305bc97baeb3d@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
X-SES-Outgoing: 2019.05.07-54.240.8.32
Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/endGBQSXVmDGLPYpAI-P3XyR5gw>
Subject: Re: [netconf] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-17
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, 07 May 2019 21:49:46 -0000


> <eric> Based on my reading of your process suggestions Kent, I like best the “mention” approach which you used for RFC-8071, Section 1.4.
>  
> What I think could be done to cover this is:
>  
> (A)  Remove Section 11: Notes to the RFC Editor
>  
> (B)  Per Kent’s desire to also cover draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-notif, place the following statement into draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications directly after Figure 10
>  
> [RFC-5277] Section 2.2.1 states that a notification message is to be sent to a subscriber which initiated a "create-subscription".   With this specification, this RFC-5277 statement should be more broadly interpreted to mean that notification messages can also be sent to a subscriber which initiated an "establish-subscription", or a configured receiver which has been sent a “subscription-started”.
>  
> Does this work for both of you? 

Works for me.



> The issue isn't consistency so much as meeting expectations, per `xml2rfc`, the document should have something like the following in the References section, which then auto-expands to the correct reference text, as well as defining the anchor "I-D.ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications":
>  
>         <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications"?>
>  
> <Eric> That definitely makes things easier than what I have been doing.  I am hitting an xml2rfc error trying this right now, but I will get there.


Yes, it was an eye-opener when I figured it out.   Be aware that, though some external sources (e.g., ITU standards) are supported, many are not, and so hand-coding the <reference> is still sometimes required...


Kent // shepherd