Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities-09.txt
Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Thu, 09 January 2020 17:14 UTC
Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.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 1C5D31200A4 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:14:50 -0800 (PST)
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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 diV7gaKNWkGX for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:14:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22d.google.com (mail-lj1-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8FD8120019 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:14:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22d.google.com with SMTP id l2so8063516lja.6 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:14:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LxpnWOauNF4Wy9DutnZ1f8VTYQnl7/fh+jpyr3ZBFbs=; b=XtrKRsCaxqiHKnYNckQFzPQpZf97RqerqurF8WjG4rUym+zshHk2RALBrI5StR+7eS H3nWHiXcA3zlbdVXjcUvmkwnzj1807DBSwSqoX1HyJM7kM+g6T6Knagtm7t+BahZBEJy bryBrnfbz6Mh404LgBeRRVZPHZOJmH9f3P/GRxN7EcboqsHgiqir5KL0eURPbe/VnqLE JVqgNfUTCqhUXM+HFc8UkrIGX5rgqB7OnxAuzSskQmQl+UT/u1RA12sOgDDq+dfirwbf 2Qd6dj/DBlXCYLxzS4mJGkL6CeQlYBkF0ekrKCmCsTgv7uYojGuTWkObEHeKi8LLIOoy tTmw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LxpnWOauNF4Wy9DutnZ1f8VTYQnl7/fh+jpyr3ZBFbs=; b=lcEuayipbK2rHvh01HZqYlwYlTUdpvvgfSwcEp92ftbI9FVAP9uqRR2plTOapIiWF3 Tx+KCfQTtVNaGzgIxJL/s+Z6V6TIXJq6ENusxK60Dy2umH45I+lmslewEbEF+TNfaYWy nCYPn8DeqcxfHKyoB9W5V/05gHzbY+p6C85r/2fZslbqHtiEzD3yN9IW4KoS/+PltxsW 9eCWQP5s2Eb8oVu9+040tF0U1Z4gFN/J++vWEnDxh+pFUnCOLFd4wlMjjn54yloJKfvf dlNEx7QZKYDXxg4fToccX4buOlv1qbiV/uE7e35kUG/7g40sAhNFuyaBCgv6SADvfkR0 lxnw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV9t7aORWEf/6vNK6zZsi/VgwZuB2wXMGDnEHd9yqru5xotlXRE hmkI5aYFWGxP65EZxNBWslD5KOl3WlK/2qXtOOU36Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxktHBRhMzX/vYksr9QastNXsohYwXDJGcr1zyfg9E9BITSuA8sAl7vmli6LJL27yDU2huElUbPI6zSn+zVK9A=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7d01:: with SMTP id y1mr7395601ljc.100.1578590085129; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:14:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <157838571918.20942.9897465405126184637.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <0100016f801b8360-00636b39-8317-4e78-a233-dba17073fc39-000000@email.amazonses.com> <CABCOCHRn_sXEh_G4TKk3stZjWW0RFOroYtocFDKc2pntza_pVw@mail.gmail.com> <20200109.125407.1696793655072242187.mbjorklu@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200109.125407.1696793655072242187.mbjorklu@cisco.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:14:34 -0800
Message-ID: <CABCOCHSUfEAoQ27pgJYmmPnrQyE-rM8ur=BNF0nVD8sfuvZCmQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbjorklu@cisco.com>
Cc: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>, Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000453ce5059bb82529"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/rzk6kz758tvFv7NhL1kxrHMMwqE>
Subject: Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities-09.txt
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: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 17:14:50 -0000
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 3:54 AM Martin Bjorklund <mbjorklu@cisco.com> wrote: > Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I think the new system capabilities module is good enough. > > The node-instance-identifier type allows a key to be missing, which > > provides some entry reuse. > > > > My concerns are with the notification capabilities module. > > > > - notification-support: why is this an enumeration instead of bits? > > > > suggest: > > > > typedef notification-support { > > type bits { > > bit notifications-for-config-changes-supported { > > description "The publisher is capable of sending > > notifications for config=true nodes, but not > > for config=false nodes for the relevant scope > > and subscription type." ; > > } > > bit notifications-for-state-changes-supported { > > description "The publisher is capable of sending > > notifications for config=false nodes, but not > > for config=true nodes for the relevant scope > > and subscription type." ; > > } > > } > > > > - can the names be shorter (config-changes, state-changes)? > > these names seem redundant and verbose > > +1 for bits and the suggested shorter names > > > > > - update-period > > this object seems implementation-specific. > > The description should be less normative and use 2119 language > > > > A periodic subscription to the selected data nodes must > > specify a value that is at least as large or greater than > > this > > > > Suggest: s/must/SHOULD/ > > I don't think either is correct. This leaf informs the client what an > acceptable 'period' value is. A client that sends a shorter period > will get a 'period-unsupported' error back, as defined in RFC 8641. > Perhaps rephrase the sentence to: > > A request for a periodic subscription to the selected data nodes > with a smaller period than what this leaf specifies will result in > a 'period-unsupported' error. > > > I agree this is better. > > - supported-update-period > > - this is very implementation-specific, especially as a leaf-list > > instead of a > > leaf with a range > > - also has 'must' language that is inappropriate; s/must/SHOULD/ > > See above. > > > - max-objects-per-update > > - extremely implementation-specific; Does this assume a server > generates > > updates > > by counting objects and stopping when this value is reached? > > - the text is not clear if it means objects or object instances? Do > > child nodes count > > as instances? IMO this object should be removed or changes to max. > > bytes per update > > (also implementation-specific) > > I agree that this is implementation-specific, and a byte-count as > well. It assumes that the implementation uses very static > datastructures. But I think it can be ok - an implementation that > doesn't have such static limits will not instantiate this leaf. > > Then there should be text in the description-stmt that this leaf will not be instantiated if the server implementation does not restrict an update to a specific number of objects. What about the supported-update-period leaf-list? If a server allows any centi-second value from 1 sec to 1 hour then this will be a leaf-list with 5900 instances in it. Since there is no reason to limit the upper-bound (e.g., client wants 1 statistics update per day) this leaf-list will likely have millions of instances in it. IMO this leaf-list should be removed. The minimum-update-period is sufficient. > /martin > Andy > > > > > - supported-excluded-change-type > > - this union has overlapping enumeration implied values > > suggest assigning value -2; and value -1; to none and all enums > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:04 AM Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear WG, > > > > > > This is a fairly substantial update that defines a generic > > > "ietf-system-capabilities’ > > > module and a separate "ietf-notification-capabilities” module that > > > augments into it. > > > > > > We could start WGLC #2 now, but it would be good to get a few > high-level > > > reactions > > > from the WG before doing so. > > > > > > Please provide comments as to if you believe the draft is ready for > WGLC > > > #2. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Kent // as shepherd > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 2020, at 3:28 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > A new version (-09) has been submitted for > > > draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities: > > > > > > > > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities-09.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities/ > > > > > > > > Diff from previous version: > > > > > > > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities-09 > > > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > > > submission > > > > until the diff is available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > > > > > IETF Secretariat. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > netconf mailing list > > > netconf@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf > > > >
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Kent Watsen
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Kent Watsen
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Kent Watsen
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Balázs Lengyel
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [netconf] New Version Notification - draft-ie… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)