Re: [netconf] Generic Capabilities model

Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 06 December 2019 19:19 UTC

Return-Path: <jefftant.ietf@gmail.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 BD54F120059 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 11:19:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.986
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.986 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 RBwBhIkJ5vu5 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 11:19:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1033.google.com (mail-pj1-x1033.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033]) (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 47F2412004A for <netconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 11:19:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1033.google.com with SMTP id g4so3126478pjs.10 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 06 Dec 2019 11:19:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=Chu0fYAjGhgLUBeHR/4sOVxWH2Yhb62etyPAKvQ9vJM=; b=h57KMdjg1813Ur7gXOolx/fUFW3KU+sD2fGJzVgILafyN3roTVvkvVv+RIEcWRzNMh 0SzmgLYAri9XXzXiC4O2CMxm0jrJNg0/pT1yYQWVhoBK+yX4IICi3+P18nRL7TNRiFWZ 79Pje2rStZdyLJbX/zdHXUxG4Bkx7TDld3iJEFIzVtH1Q2ZxCxdZDKcwRBfhFJdx9fEa gdCuC5Hr6L2SDFOo8ZysJxH09GVhbEA6xvQIw/9Z7M2/CjCiD6Nn9693YWnAhWKdzUO+ gcZh+p+UmwqTG3qWgF74T/YuT9BIx5MmaRYz0QGb0MaT8FInBP6Tw52YMHvGLXMYBxEm zN7A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=Chu0fYAjGhgLUBeHR/4sOVxWH2Yhb62etyPAKvQ9vJM=; b=B7AISOEKZvyxLS2vS+Sl0T3b9RLfhP69kyvdQ5ABSdGC3d0er4kZdikaaLUrLCiweu wQmLU4nSFAxExmzn+v++aWAFUSM8Durv4dKUSPwH1jWdxgAvaDXHhxIjRuefltM/xi3I dwPhEWrRTOBRsNfwH/awztb2L+74f7czK0nF5Y5UtGgZXNT4lng10fZzeGf3AwYcieta gaqDOJPz7yLC/PQo34f2gg9o603HvjxRelw1zjmZzZbxfnkCIIyoqYKx+Bykhd00iMfc b0iS4cgwmWBrOPRXHcIJkqOKz/6fwfZN2yYdXCxRA138tkOsXXTOeweo270AvsAI2wXr eyEg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWQ7JEVv5DhiVjoBWwm8EVqo370BQc4cKrgv5Tcw1S4vpBqRiKB tfLXpTMyCas0IIQ+JCyYRuo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwpoEaut+qBLqi89ekflG4GM7LF7XfRUSVYUnRbvgycqtpMs3B5p8zi2reLlNNEpjk1da8kMw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:ec0f:: with SMTP id l15mr16802900pjy.39.1575659970733; Fri, 06 Dec 2019 11:19:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.6] (c-73-189-13-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.189.13.44]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p186sm10336394pfp.56.2019.12.06.11.19.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 06 Dec 2019 11:19:29 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-23BF1C6C-18DD-4BBD-A2B8-19F680E83E69
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 11:19:29 -0800
Message-Id: <61BC8A63-4F6B-4555-8AAC-E792458D23A3@gmail.com>
References: <960F9BA1-62A4-4BB6-B6AF-D338B0C1FD61@cisco.com>
Cc: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <960F9BA1-62A4-4BB6-B6AF-D338B0C1FD61@cisco.com>
To: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17A878)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/yTYmO4F08tY3MnJaHZBHKXJYPtE>
Subject: Re: [netconf] Generic Capabilities model
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: Fri, 06 Dec 2019 19:19:34 -0000

+1

Regards,
Jeff

> On Dec 6, 2019, at 10:46, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) <rrahman@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> +1 for the generic capabilities work.
>  
> From: netconf <netconf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of 'Andy Bierman' <andy@yumaworks.com>
> Date: Thursday, December 5, 2019 at 4:44 PM
> To: "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>
> Cc: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [netconf] Generic Capabilities model
>  
> Hi,
>  
> I strongly support this generic capabilities work.
> IMO this approach would make NMDA much easier for a client to support, since the new /yang-library
> would not be needed for this purpose.  Instead, a simple "nmda-operational" capability could be used in this module
> to easily identify which config=true nodes should be expected in <operational>.
>  
> The complexity in /yang-library might be justified if new writable datastores (like <ephemeral>) are
> ever introduced, but not for solving the problem "what features does this server support for the specified
> data node (resource)"?
>  
>  
> Andy
>  
>  
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 9:15 AM Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco..com> wrote:
> Hi Qin,
> 
> I would agree.
> I believe it's important to have a generic solution. I can picture more augmentations.
> The change is trivial IMO, i.e. modify the ietf-notification-capabilities model
> Rename the top level container to system-capabilities
> Add a container subscription-capabilities to the grouping subscription-capabilities to contain all subscription related capabilities
> Invite others to augment the model with similar groupings for other capabilities. 
> Regards, Benoit.
> 
> Hi, Balazs:
> In last IETF meeting, you offered a proposal in netmod session on notification capability change that was discussed in netmod session.
> I think it is a good idea to define generic capabilities model in draft-ietf-netconf-notification-capabilities
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/slides-106-netmod-sessb-generic-model-for-server-capabilities-00
> since we have other capabilities that need to be covered, one of example such capability is one that can be self-described in
> draft-tao-netmod-yang-node-tags.
> With such new capability, should we augment from YANG Push model or should we augment from notification capability?
> We see one downside of augmenting from YANG Push model, is it only can be used in the running time, it can not be used in the design time or
> Implementation time.
>  
> So I think if one generic capability model can be defined, it will allow more flexibility to add new capability. However if we decide to take this approach,
> Probably notification capabilities draft require substantial changes to the current model structure. But I think it worth to do so, in my personal view.
>  
> -Qin
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netconf mailing list
> netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>  
> _______________________________________________
> netconf mailing list
> netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> _______________________________________________
> netconf mailing list
> netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf