Re: [Netconf] Confirmed commit

[Jonathan Hansford <[e-mail]>]

 

I propose the following changes to address Andy's issue relating to
consecutive confirmed commits and my issue relating to the confusing
terminology: 

8.4.1. Description (paras 2-6)
A <commit> operation with
the <confirmed> parameter (an unconfirmed <commit>) MUST be reverted if
a confirming commit is not issued within the timeout period (by default
600 seconds = 10 minutes). The confirming commit is a <commit> operation
without the <confirmed> parameter and, if successful, cannot be
reverted. The timeout period can be adjusted with the <confirm-timeout>
parameter. If a follow-up unconfirmed <commit> operation is issued
before the timer expires, the timer is reset to the new value (600
seconds by default). Both the confirming commit and a follow-up
unconfirmed <commit> operation MAY introduce additional changes to the
configuration.
If the <persist> element is not given in the unconfirmed
commit operation, any follow-up commit and the confirming commit MUST be
issued on the same session that issued the unconfirmed commit. If the
<persist> element is given in the unconfirmed <commit> operation, a
follow-up commit and the confirming commit can be given on any session,
and they MUST include a <persist-id> element with a value equal to the
given value of the <persist> element.
If the server also advertises the
:startup capability, a <copy-config> from running to startup is also
necessary to save the changes to startup. If the session issuing a
sequence of one or more unconfirmed commits is terminated for any reason
before the confirm timeout expires, the server MUST restore the
configuration to its state before the sequence of unconfirmed commits
was issued, unless the last unconfirmed commit also included a <persist>
element.
If the device reboots for any reason before the confirm timeout
expires, the server MUST restore the configuration to its state before
the sequence of unconfirmed commits was issued.
If a confirming commit
is not issued, the device will revert its configuration to the state
prior to the issuance of the first in the current sequence of
unconfirmed commits. To cancel the current sequence of unconfirmed
commits and revert changes without waiting for the confirm timeout to
expire, the client can explicitly restore the configuration to its state
before the sequence of unconfirmed commits was issued, by using the
<cancel-commit> operation.
:
8.4.4.1.
<cancel-commit>
Description:
Cancels an ongoing sequence of unconfirmed
commits. If the <persist-id> parameter is not given, the <cancel-commit>
operation MUST be issued on the same session that issued the sequence of
unconfirmed commits.
Parameters:
persist-id:
Cancels a persistent
sequence of unconfirmed commits. The value MUST be equal to the value
given in the <persist> parameter to the <commit> operation. If the value
does not match, the operation fails with an "invalid-value"
error.
:
8.4.5.1. <commit>
The :confirmed-commit:1.1 capability allows 4
additional parameters to the <commit>
operation.
Parameters:
confirmed:
Perform an unconfirmed <commit>
operation.
confirm-timeout:
Timeout period for confirmed commit, in
seconds. If unspecified, the confirm timeout defaults to 600
seconds.
persist:
Make the unconfirmed commit survive a session
termination, and set a token on the ongoing sequence of unconfirmed
commits.
persist-id:
Used to issue a follow-up unconfirmed commit or a
confirming commit from any session, with the token from the previous
<commit> operation.

On 2013-09-20 11:08, Bert Wijnen (IETF) wrote: 

>
THat is one (and probably good) approach.
> 
> So can the
authors/experts suggest some text that makes
> sense as a fix (or better
clarification) to a possible
> erratum?
> 
> Bert
> 
> On 9/20/13 10:00
AM, Jonathan Hansford wrote:
> 
>> Would it be worth agreeing text
online then raising an erratum? Sent from my BlackBerry -----Original
Message----- From: "Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <[e-mail] [1]> Date:
Fri, 20 Sep 2013 08:41:42 To: Andy Bierman<[e-mail] [2]>;
Jonathan Hansford<[e-mail] [3]>; Netconf<[e-mail]
[4]> Subject: Re: [Netconf] Confirmed commit See at bottom On 9/20/13
7:13 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: 
>> 
>>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at
01:39:28PM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: 
>>> 
>>>> Hi, I always found
section 8.4.1, para 2 confusing. T0: /int8.1 does not exist 
>>>> 
>>>>>
merge /int8.1 value=20 commit confirmed confirm-timeout=60
>>>> T1:
/int8.1 = 20 merge /int8.1 value=30 commit confirmed confirm-timeout=60
T2: /int8.1 = 30 T3: timeout occurs: para 6 says: If a confirming commit
is not issued, the device will revert its configuration to the state
prior to the issuance of the confirmed commit. The problem is that there
are 2 confirmed commit operations. At time T3 does the server go back to
state T1 or T0? (Our server goes back to T0). The 2nd commit contains a
confirmed parameter, and para 2 sentence 2 clearly says this is not a
confirming commit. The text does not actually define a "confirmed
commit", but I assume it is a commit with a confirmed parameter.
Therefore, paragraphs 5 - 7 are wrong where they refer to "the confirmed
commit", because there are 2 of them.
>>> Yes, this corner case where
multiple confirmed commits are issued is not described well. Your
interpretation that subsequent confirmed commits effectively extend the
first one makes sense to me.
>> Can wee keep this somewhere so we
clarify it if we ever have to open up and update the document? Bert 
>>

>>> /js
 

Links:
------
[1] mailto:[e-mail]
[2]
mailto:[e-mail]
[3] mailto:[e-mail]
[4]
mailto:[e-mail]