[netconf] 答复: WGLC: draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities-11

["taoran (F)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi, all,

I have two comments on this draft as follows:

1. Section 5.1 said:
“
   augment /sysc:system-capabilities/sysc:datastore-capabilities/ +
     |                                 sysc:per-node-capabilities:
     +--ro subscription-capabilities
        +--ro (update-period)?
        |  +--:(minimum-update-period)
        |  |  +--ro minimum-update-period?        uint32
        |  +--:(supported-update-period)
        |     +--ro supported-update-period*      uint32
        +--ro max-nodes-per-update?               uint32
        +--ro minimum-dampening-period?           uint32 {yp:on-change}?
        +--ro on-change-supported?                notification-support
        |                                                {yp:on-change}?
        +--ro periodic-notifications-supported?   notification-support
        +--ro supported-excluded-change-type*     union {yp:on-change}?
”
I believe on-change-supported and supported-excluded-change-type are related to each other, i.e., only when on-change-supported holds,
Support-excluded-change-type needs to be supported. Would it make sense to add when statement under supported-excluded-change-type.
One Follow up comment is should supported-excluded-change-type be applicable to config true node or config false node?

2. Section 5.2 said:
“
       leaf-list supported-excluded-change-type {
         if-feature yp:on-change;
         type union {
           type enumeration {
             enum none {
               value -2 ;
               description "None of the change types can be excluded.";
             }
             enum all {
               value -1 ;
               description
                 "Any combination of change types can be excluded.";
             }
           }
           type yp:change-type;
         }
         description "The change types that can be excluded in
           YANG-Push subscriptions.";
       }
”
It is not clear to me when should assign negative number to enum value, does it indicate it is an error or warning? If it is not, I prefer to assign positive numer to enum value.


Best regards,

Ran
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: netconf [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表 Kent Watsen
发送时间: 2020年3月5日 5:54
收件人: [e-mail]
主题: Re: [netconf] WGLC: draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities-11

Dear All,

This WGLC has received zero responses, which is insufficient to progress the document at this time.  The chairs have therefore decided to extend the WGLC for another two weeks, now ending March 18th.  

Again, positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication", are welcomed.  This is useful and important, even from authors.  Objections, concerns, and suggestions are also welcomed at this time.

The NETCONF Chairs




> On Feb 17, 2020, at 8:27 PM, Kent Watsen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> FWIW, this is WGLC #2, after the major updates resulting from WGLC #1 (in October).
> 
> K.
> 
> 
>> On Feb 17, 2020, at 7:47 PM, Kent Watsen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> This message begins a two-week WGLC for draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities-11 ending on March 2nd (a week before the IETF 107 submission cutoff deadline).  Here is a direct link to the HTML version of the draft:
>> 
>> 	https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities-11
>> 
>> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome!  This is useful and important, even from authors.  Objections, concerns, and suggestions are also welcomed at this time.
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> NETCONF Chairs
>> _______________________________________________
>> netconf mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netconf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf

_______________________________________________
netconf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf