IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netconf] Adoption call for draft-lindblad-netconf-transaction-id-02

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Tue, 23 August 2022 05:25 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.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 D21FAC14CE3E for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 22:25:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nTU9C1xirNwA for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 22:25:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 627CCC14CE33 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 22:25:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml737-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.207]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4MBd3C3YJ2z67nNr for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2022 13:25:11 +0800 (CST)
Received: from canpemm100007.china.huawei.com (7.192.105.181) by fraeml737-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Tue, 23 Aug 2022 07:25:33 +0200
Received: from canpemm500005.china.huawei.com (7.192.104.229) by canpemm100007.china.huawei.com (7.192.105.181) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Tue, 23 Aug 2022 13:25:31 +0800
Received: from canpemm500005.china.huawei.com ([7.192.104.229]) by canpemm500005.china.huawei.com ([7.192.104.229]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.024; Tue, 23 Aug 2022 13:25:31 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netconf] Adoption call for draft-lindblad-netconf-transaction-id-02
Thread-Index: Adi2sK+hliGq+Lp1Okew23Tr4Ysu+g==
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 05:25:31 +0000
Message-ID: <c5cc471a6f7645c287b45e89a3a0c8ab@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.136.100.16]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/npBijAcTCykOoHNS2c4PLn4rU7o>
Subject: Re: [netconf] Adoption call for draft-lindblad-netconf-transaction-id-02
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 23 Aug 2022 05:25:36 -0000

I have read the latest version and support adoption of this work with the following comments:
1.s/confiuguration /configuration
2. not clear what "being untouched by others" indicates? I assume it is referred to section 3.4.1.1 of RFC8040:
"The "If-Unmodified-Since" header field
   (Section 3.4 of [RFC7232]) can be used in edit operation requests to
   cause the server to reject the request if the resource has been
   modified since the specified timestamp."
3. I agree the Transaction ID is checksum of small data configuration, I am wondering what the data type of transaction ID? Is it same as Etag or last modified data type, or is it integer value with specific ranges? I feel this is not clear in the text, some text is needed for clarification.
4. Suggest to add versioned nodes as a new terminology, to be honest, I believe checksum and versioned seems two different concept, if it is the same, clarification is needed.
5. Transaction ID in fact introduce stateful mechanism and require the server to maintain state for transaction ID meta data information for various nodes at different levels.
In addition, I think it is necessary to define client behavior on transaction ID, e.g., the client doesn't need to maintain the state for transaction ID, but it could use transaction ID
captured from the previous message exchanges for the subsequent message exchange.

-Qin
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: netconf [mailto:netconf-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Kent Watsen
发送时间: 2022年8月10日 21:37
收件人: netconf@ietf.org
主题: [netconf] Adoption call for draft-lindblad-netconf-transaction-id-02

NETCONF WG,

This message starts a two week poll ending on Aug 24, to decide if the document in the Subject line should be made a WG document or not. Please reply-all to this email as to whether or not you support adoption of this draft by the WG. Indications that the draft has been read are also appreciated.  From the IPR-poll, there is no known IPR associated with this draft.

	https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lindblad-netconf-transaction-id

Thanks,
Kent (and Mahesh)


_______________________________________________
netconf mailing list
netconf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email