IETF Logo Mail Archive

[netmod] Re: comments on system-config-08 draft

Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net> Thu, 22 August 2024 15:12 UTC

Return-Path: <010001917aa52f3b-02340517-a63d-42ee-8c27-590f00b4b451-000000@amazonses.watsen.net>
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 5B34EC151066 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kZIj07wOfBfZ for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a8-96.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-96.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.96]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4523C14F738 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=ug7nbtf4gccmlpwj322ax3p6ow6yfsug; d=amazonses.com; t=1724339531; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:Feedback-ID; bh=4bKjE48up3BblDowyWS82qhXcyGmKah9vEqLcI0RKHk=; b=FM+VEfBwTkXs2yB9SopiPfr+nUoFq4Lu2BEfspTzDd35jYpc3bACXgDqwfVHCtJn vdKNvN5eHbJxULOLTLwi/izMRm/a1PU8V1+CredKAED+q6MkiOaV7E/cuXxLstPl8Fe uR7PC+ao8/hyxGVzNWHt9Cdtap+988zuHxU0v2AU=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.400.31\))
From: Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net>
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHQihWy92AzWzgQSVFuWFuHEkN-_yK5T-r=jL0r5eOPkTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 15:12:11 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <010001917aa52f3b-02340517-a63d-42ee-8c27-590f00b4b451-000000@email.amazonses.com>
References: <CABCOCHScHJENof+1obOgXUDZZMhhPhs9rvKHw4W0RRfF0R1_Hw@mail.gmail.com> <bf769710572f4b3884d58d128cf58305@huawei.com> <CABCOCHRWgBpt1Cx4FJqec=-80_PLvRKK1gz7oWJ06C=+_zjNRA@mail.gmail.com> <0100019175c50c8e-f22d8526-dfbf-49a2-badb-6ad10afd0186-000000@email.amazonses.com> <CABCOCHQihWy92AzWzgQSVFuWFuHEkN-_yK5T-r=jL0r5eOPkTQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.400.31)
Feedback-ID: ::1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
X-SES-Outgoing: 2024.08.22-54.240.8.96
Message-ID-Hash: KMHRKR3QHBCBWEFFTMNE2ITZBSTTNAEV
X-Message-ID-Hash: KMHRKR3QHBCBWEFFTMNE2ITZBSTTNAEV
X-MailFrom: 010001917aa52f3b-02340517-a63d-42ee-8c27-590f00b4b451-000000@amazonses.watsen.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-netmod.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [netmod] Re: comments on system-config-08 draft
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/j0lO_HX5Oxo44-ie2aC9d854QDI>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:netmod-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:netmod-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:netmod-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Andy,

> So you are planning new protocol versions with NBC changes as well?

Yes.  The NETCONF WG already kicked-off (sort of) the NETCONF-next and RESTCONF-next efforts.  The “plan” is to first publish a BC (backwards compatible) version of the protocols to address low-hanging items, and then an NBC versions to align with YANG-next.

The question is if telling the client that it “running alone MAY be valid” (was “MUST") can be in the BC update.  Technically, there is no change to the protocol on the wire, it’s only a change in how the client processing, so maybe okay for NC1.2 / RC1.1?

Kent // as a contributor

v2.36.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status