Re: [netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8040 (6271)

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

Maybe the wording is too strong?

    OLD: These parameters are only allowed if... 
    NEW: These parameters are only processed if…

Note also the HTTP goal to be idempotent.

K.


> On Sep 1, 2020, at 3:28 PM, Andy Bierman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I agree this errata should be accepted.
> 
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 10:37 AM RFC Errata System <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8040,
> "RESTCONF Protocol".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6271 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6271>
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Kent Watsen <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> 
> Section: 4.5
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
>    The "insert" (Section 4.8.5) and "point" (Section 4.8.6) query
>    parameters MUST be supported by the PUT method for data resources.
>    These parameters are only allowed if the list or leaf-list is
>    "ordered-by user".
> 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>    The "insert" (Section 4.8.5) and "point" (Section 4.8.6) query
>    parameters MUST be supported by the PUT method for data resources.
>    These parameters are only allowed if the target resource is a
>    non-existent entry of an "ordered-by user" list or leaf-list.
> 
> Notes
> -----
> First, Section 3.5 (Data Resource) says that "list" and "leaf-leaf" are not a data resources:
> 
>   A data resource represents a YANG data node that is a descendant node
>   of a datastore resource. Each YANG-defined data node can be uniquely
>   targeted by the request-line of an HTTP method. Containers, leafs,
>   leaf-list entries, list entries, anydata nodes, and anyxml nodes are
>   data resources.
> 
> Second, these query parameters only make sense when targeting a non-existent entry.   If the entry does not exist, then PUT is being used like a POST: to create and place an item in an ordered list.  However, if the entry exists, then PUT is being used to both replace the contents and (presumably) re-place the order in the list; but this doesn't make sense because:
> 
>   1) "insert" defaults to "last".
>   2) there is no "insert" value to indicate "keep existing placement".
>   3) having to concoct valid "insert" and "point" values is hard.
> 
> Thus indiscriminate PUTs would move entries to the end, which can't be desired...
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8040 (draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-18)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : RESTCONF Protocol
> Publication Date    : January 2017
> Author(s)           : A. Bierman, M. Bjorklund, K. Watsen
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Network Configuration
> Area                : Operations and Management
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG