Re: [Netconf] netconf call home connection type

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Martin,

Catching up on mail from last week.


>> Also, it seems that, if we want YP+SN to be able to use call-home 
>> for configured subscriptions, then we need to update the SN draft
>> to A) define the "activate-configured-subscription" RPC
>
> I started to write that I don't think this belongs to the SN draft,
> since it is NETCONF-specific.  But after thinking some more about it I
> think it makes sense to define this operation in the SN draft.
>
> For RESTCONF (not a new HTTP protocol) this rpc could be used
> by augmenting a 'location' leaf to its output.
>
> It is probably useful for any protocol that does RPCs.  But for a
> notif-specific transport like a UDP-based protocol, that doesn't do
> normal RPCs at all, an "activate-configured-subscription" RPC doesn't
> make sense.  But that is ok.

Right, but there is an issue of timing.  There is a question if this
is needed now or if it can be added in a SN-bis.  Adding the RPC would
easy, but adding the identity (rfc8071bis?) would be more involved.

Note that said RPC would be used for call-home connections (i.e., where
the roles are reversed), but unlikely to be used for regular connections
(i.e., when the publisher is the NC/RC-client).  The RPC would need to
be documented as only being relevant to call-home connections.


>> and B)
>> define an identity off of the base "call-home-reason" identity
>> defined in the aforementioned I-D.  This is needed before any
>> notif draft can define support for "configured" subscriptions,
>> right?
>
> Yes, but if we define this identity now in SN it would delay SN.
> Better to define it later either in SN-bis or directly in a separate
> document.

So, configured subscriptions in SN is known to be broken for call-home
connections?  Should the SN draft identify this as a known limitation?


Kent // contributor