Re: [Netconf] LC on yang-push-15

Hi Balazs,

Thank you for your comments!  We had already a brief discussion on this in person.  We will address the editorial comments in the next revision; brief replies below just on the items that you called out as "major" (still essentially editorial in nature), <ALEX>.

Thanks
--- Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: Netconf <netconf-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Balazs Lengyel
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 1:24 PM
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>; netconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Netconf] LC on yang-push-15

Hell,

I have reviewed and support this draft if my 2 MAJOR comments are addressed.

Some comments:

P7) Generally a number of items are repeated in the draft which makes it longer then necessary.  Paragraph: " On-change subscriptions can be refined to let users subscribe only to .." could be removed.

Bullet 1.: Just before the change: how can a node know before the change that it will happen?

P15) Paragraphs 2 and 3 seem to contradict each other.  Para2. states "A publisher MUST allow ..." while Pra 3. states the same MAY be rejected.

P16) "Update records for a single subscription MAY NOT be resequenced" Use MUST NOT

P17)
Remove 3.11.2   It says the same as chapter 3.4
4.1  reference the RFC about the tree diagrams instead of describing them hereP21) Modify-subscription:  Why can't the resync and excluded operation be modified?

P24) Why does the resynch-subscription-error contain period-hints and filter-failure-hint ?

P28)  MAJOR
Figure 8 does not follow the YANG model of subscribed-notifications

<ALEX> We will fix the example. </ALEX>

General) MAJOR
When an error is returned will the identity string contain the prefix? 
According to YANG 1.1 it should however all examples omit it.

<ALEX> We will fix any errors in the examples, of course; however, I am not entirely sure regarding which specific issue you are referring to, can you be more specific?   In https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-08#page-8, section 8, it is clearly specified what error-app-tag will contain, and the examples are consistent with that.  There is an implicit "identity-to-string" conversion that is applied.  RFC 6241 specifies "error-app-tag:  Contains a string identifying the data-model-specific or implementation-specific error condition, if one exists. "  There is no specific mention of a prefix being required nor do I see one in examples there.  I am also not sure I see it in RFC 7950.  (We can perhaps also clarify this offline) 
</ALEX>

P34)
Why is resynch not allowed for configured on-change notifications?
identity datastore-not-subscribable: may indicate the datastore is not present at all

P35) "the response's 'error-info' may contain:" unfinished sentence

P46) anydata datastore-changes: delta includes config false nodes

regards Balazs

On 2/28/2018 11:08 PM, Kent Watsen wrote:
> WG,
>
> The authors of netconf-event-notifications have indicated privately that they believe this document is now ready for Last Call.
>
> This starts a 2.5-week Last Call on draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-15 
> [1] The LC will end on March 17, or when active threads peter out.
>
> Please send your comments on this thread. Reviews of the document, and statement of support, are particularly helpful to the authors.  If you have concerns about the document, please state those too.
>
> Authors please indicate if you are aware of any IPR on the document.
>
>
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-15
>
>
> Kent & Mahesh
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>

-- 
Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
Senior Specialist
Mobile: +36-70-330-7909              email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com

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