[Netconf] Minutes 14-Dec: NETCONF/RESTCONF/HTTP2 Subscription & Event drafts

["Eric Voit (evoit)" <[e-mail]>]

Minutes posted at:
https://github.com/netconf-wg/yang-push/wiki/Minutes-2016-12-14

·        As always, our DezignTM Team is a gathering of individuals providing informal input to NETCONF. We ask NETCONF WG to comment on our discussion results as a preparation for the WG consensus. Please approach Eric Voit if you want to be included directly in these meetings.


Meeting Materials

Attending

WebEx Recording<https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/lsr.php?RCID=1872c1d6b7344389bda21c54a1db071d>
password: JmnEiji8

Andy Bierman, Alexander Clemm, Ambika Tripathy, Einar Nilsen-Nygaard, Eric Voit, Tim Jenkins, Balazs Lengyel, Mahesh Jethanandani, Ambika Tripathy

5277bis Scope & Naming

  *   Strong agreement that the existing functional split between 5277bis & yang-push is appropriate and that both are needed
     *   Beyond the reasons list on the WG alias: MSDC needs transports other than NETCONF & RESTCONF
  *   Action Item for Mahesh & Mehmet
     *   Nobody we know of is suggesting extending create-subscription. Do you/WG support the path that we make 5277 legacy, with a recommendation that existing implementations can and should continue to be supported via an advertisement "urn:ietf:params:netconf:capability:notification:1.0"?
     *   If yes, do we need a charter change?
        *   (Eric addition post meeting) If yes, this charter update could be as simple as changing the charter text "Enhance RFC 5277" to "Create a specification which takes RFC 5277 capabilities and enhances it"
  *   If/when the appropriate charter change is made, we will change the name of the doc from 5277bis. Suggested name is: draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications

Management operations on configured subscriptions

  *   The operator needs the capability to tear down a Dynamic subscription
     *   We won't use delete-subscription as NACM has no ability to differentiate
  *   New Kill subscription RPC will go into 5277bis.
     *   Could put NACM "very-secure" tag on this RPC so that only administrators can access.
     *   Must be able to support a subscription-termination notification to dynamic & configured subscriptions.

Data Plane Notifications

  *   Subscription ID in data plane needs to be done always, and will be layered into the document. This is different than 5277.
  *   Headers: we want to allow extensibility for data plane notifications. Example: a potential for Trace-ID for diagnostics
  *   Action Item: Andy is willing to provide text for this. This could be built off of TailF extension as starting point for the data structure.

"identifier" vs "subscription-id"

  *   Review from Martin suggests moving to "identifier" is used for edit-config. "subscription-id"
  *   "subscription-id" is used for RPCs? Is there a convention as to why not?
  *   Key is that we must disambiguate.
  *   Post meeting note: I can't see a time where we will pass the filter identifier via an RPC. (It is just being passed as a reference.) So it should be ok to use identifier for both objects.

Filters.

  *   Do we reopen filters beyond xpath and 6241? Answer is no.
     *   Combining filters is hard. It doesn't work for Get & Get-config. E.g., depth and filters isn't something we understand yet.
  *   We do allow for augmentation for these as a future filter type.

Counters for Pass/Drop

  *   Still pending is the need for operational data, including total and passed update counters.