Re: [netmod] [Netconf] LC of NDMA NETCONF/RESTCONF drafts

[Andy Bierman <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 09:11:58AM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote:
> > >
> > Then remove the text that says an error is sent if with-defaults
> attempted
> > on <operational>.
> > None of this new text needs to go into NMDA. It can be a vendor-specific
> > mystery what gets set as origin=default.  Implementors can read RFC 6243
> > and figure it out on their own.
>
> As I said, I am absolutely fine with the option of being silent about
> with-defaults and if needed someone can spin an update of RFC 6243.
>
>

This is not needed.


   If the "with-defaults" parameter
   is present in a request to such a datastore, then the server MUST

      return an error, as specified in "ietf-netconf-nmda" (see Section 4
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-netconf-03#section-4>).


         The 'with-defaults' parameter does not apply to operational
         datastores. If the 'with-defaults' parameter is present in a
         request to an operational datastore, then the server MUST
         return an <rpc-error> element with an <error-tag> value of
         'invalid-value'.";



There are 2 places in the draft that say MUST send an error.
You need to add detailed text explaining what "harm to the Internet"
is caused if this parameter is accepted. You cannot use MUST
unless interoperability is harmed by allowing a server to
omit response data containing the YANG default value.
Please explain all the problems solved by this MUST constraint.


Please explain in detail in the draft WHY



         The 'with-defaults' parameter does not apply to operational
         datastores.


This assertion is false.






> /js
>

Andy



>
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   [phone]         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>