[netmod] pls clarify get operation

"Fengchong (frank)" <frank.fengchong@huawei.com> Thu, 27 June 2019 02:02 UTC

Return-Path: <frank.fengchong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50687120124; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 19:02:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aLrwH1e9e-wu; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 19:02:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A87FF12006B; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 19:02:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 0881B9334E23E2C6F631; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 03:02:39 +0100 (IST)
Received: from DGGEMM424-HUB.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 03:02:30 +0100
Received: from DGGEMM513-MBX.china.huawei.com ([]) by dggemm424-hub.china.huawei.com ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:58:57 +0800
From: "Fengchong (frank)" <frank.fengchong@huawei.com>
To: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
CC: Yangshouchuan <yangshouchuan@huawei.com>, "Zhangwei (SS)" <zhangwei70@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: pls clarify get operation
Thread-Index: AdUsiu4JIzTUBFYNTIGSUYTtxnFLqw==
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 01:58:55 +0000
Message-ID: <5756FB984666AD4BB8E1D63E2E3AA3D001ED5272@dggemm513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5756FB984666AD4BB8E1D63E2E3AA3D001ED5272dggemm513mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/-QihhJGNvgv85Cul5RU_Z1EVa9U>
Subject: [netmod] pls clarify get operation
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 02:02:44 -0000

Hi all,
In RFC6241, get operation is defined as:
7.7<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6241#section-7.7>.  <get>

   Description:  Retrieve running configuration and device state

This description is too simply, so I think it should be clarified.

The case is: a data node modelled by one yang can be configured by user, but also can be created/modified by system or other protocols. If client issues get operation to retrieve this node,
          The data is created/modified by system or other protocols SHOULD be returned?
          For example:
          Rib can be configured by user and also can be created by routing protocols. In RFC 8349, the rib list is defined as:

      +--rw ribs

         +--rw rib* [name]

            +--rw name              string

            +--rw address-family?   identityref

            +--ro default-rib?      boolean {multiple-ribs}?

            +--ro routes

            |  +--ro route*

            |        ...

            +---x active-route

            |  +---w input

            |  |  +---w v4ur:destination-address?   inet:ipv4-address

            |  |  +---w v6ur:destination-address?   inet:ipv6-address

            |  +--ro output

            |        ...

            +--rw description?      string

       If client issued get operation to retrieve ribs from non-NMDA device, rib instance created by routing protocols should be returned?

       Another associated question: If client issued get-config operation from non-NMDA device, only user-controlled rib instance should be returned?