Re: [netmod] notifications
Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Thu, 19 January 2017 07:00 UTC
Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 597B112940E for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 23:00:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.cz
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 xFhvGp8RZ-8d for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 23:00:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [217.31.204.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E24F11294E7 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 23:00:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:4832:4aae:79dd:a6d0] (unknown [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:4832:4aae:79dd:a6d0]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F6CF60AD4; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:00:06 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1484809206; bh=TMuyah80B+ur0CexsmLA0xfbc/K5k7aKZZzKE8EtetI=; h=From:Date:To; b=f2sMM0UfHGEtFWJ1BdOSB4mK0ByXuE8wrmZ3x0R8gZYUPaXVIKbja2TrL/C6AlWdp rsL52CXPi5mtSEyYltrU4PsvvcAISGa1NGVkFB/ERHJ45ks1GgeDdCFDb4ASwY+x/8 Iqi4FZc2eVBalrIrPYZbgFwVSAAE6kwGS/jMytqU=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20170118191326.GB5811@elstar.local>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:00:08 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FF5AB4B7-B703-4006-953E-2C5F15DC30D5@nic.cz>
References: <m2wpds4i5t.fsf@birdie.labs.nic.cz> <20170118191326.GB5811@elstar.local>
To: Jürgen Schönwälder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/BLum72nNT3ZiI9R_yBILhTtVc20>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] notifications
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 19 Jan 2017 07:00:15 -0000
> On 18 Jan 2017, at 20:13, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > > The only references to RFC 5277 in the YANG 1.1 specification I found > refers to the <notification> element. I do not see anything broken or > worth fixing. Configuration and state data, RPC operations and everything else is defined in Section 3, either directly or by reference to RFC 6241. Notifications aren't. Lada > > /js > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 02:22:22PM +0100, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> Hi, >> >> if NETCONF WG moves away from RFC 5277, what does it mean for YANG? In my >> opinion, we have two options: >> >> 1. remove references to 5277 from the YANG spec and define a notification >> as any data sent asynchronously by the server, or >> >> 2. generalize even more and treat a particular notification as just >> another type of data tree. >> >> BTW, the Terminology section in RFC 7950 doesn't contain a definition of >> a notification (unlike pretty much everything else). Is it just an >> omission or was it intentional? >> >> Lada >> >> -------------------- Start of forwarded message -------------------- >> From: "Mehmet Ersue" <mersue@gmail.com> >> To: "'Netconf'" <netconf@ietf.org> >> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 00:06:14 +0100 >> Subject: [Netconf] New Notification and Subscription Features WASFW: 3 >> Options for Subscription & Event Notification draft structure >> >> ... >> >> B) NETCONF co-chairs further propose that NETCONF WG should use its energy >> in the future to complete and improve the new notification and subscription >> RFCs and stop maintaining RFC 5277 for issues other than errata. Note that >> it is required that RFC 5277 and all new work needs to gracefully co-exist >> in any deployment. >> >> -- >> Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs >> PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> netmod mailing list >> netmod@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
- [netmod] notifications Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] notifications Alexander Clemm
- Re: [netmod] notifications Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] notifications Ladislav Lhotka