[netconf] Re: YANG Push Lite presentation

[Reshad Rahman <[e-mail]>]

 Hi Andy,
> I do not understand the issue with dampening.Within the implementation, it means how often you check for changes.It is effectively the same as the 'period' for a periodic subscription.How does an on-change subscription work without this parameter?
In the context of continuously changing data such as counters I understand the statement above. But for state changes, dampening-period isn't needed (although I realize this is implementation specific).
Regards,Reshad.
    On Friday, November 8, 2024 at 11:08:24 AM EST, Andy Bierman <[e-mail]> wrote:  
 
 Hi,

I hope this work gets high priority.There are many I-Ds already so please do not start over or greatly expand the scope. I have been saying that YANG Push is too complicated since I was on the DTthat created RFC 8639,40,41.
We have a fairly complete implementation of dynamic subscriptions.Glad to see there is now consensus to get rid of the YANG Patch update.We decided the same thing a long time ago:https://docs.yumaworks.com/en/latest/cli/netconfd-pro.html#push-simop-patch-update
Also agree that a push update is not a full replace, but rather justgather what is being reported.  That is also how our server works.
I do not understand the issue with dampening.Within the implementation, it means how often you check for changes.It is effectively the same as the 'period' for a periodic subscription.How does an on-change subscription work without this parameter?

Andy


_______________________________________________
netconf mailing list -- [e-mail]
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]