Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-06
"Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com> Tue, 16 May 2017 20:58 UTC
Return-Path: <evoit@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yang-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61AF512EC09; Tue, 16 May 2017 13:58:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 P-64R987PfFi; Tue, 16 May 2017 13:58:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AE2912EC73; Tue, 16 May 2017 13:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4500; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1494968039; x=1496177639; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=u2slkq/JndUfMd8dB7pcp2EIYxCVCe/w3dh7G9tdRS0=; b=fiqIIZRbmzlkrI9Px9Zh5X8clh89Ep43s/M1uIDTEyNS4D8KcMHTQKgw Lvip1mccs5lkrXLRmGO8fAR0l3uYKdZ8fFN7Jo55+7ycepurLa7n6aoIV uf1Y5fRfInJ8FgXo/K+pqUeZ7MfpBoaw09rnz+qNKHA/4wOrwkK5vio/j Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AyAQCbZRtZ/4UNJK1SChoBAQEBAgEBAQEIAQEBAYNVYoETg2WKGJFklXWCDy6FdgIahTU/GAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRgBAQEBAgEjEUUFCwIBCA4HBQIIAR0CAgIwFRACBAENDYoTCA6sSIImiwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEYBYELhVSBXoMbhDuDOoJBHwWeCgGHG4t2kXSUQgEfOIEKcBWFPRyBY3uHMYENAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.38,350,1491264000"; d="scan'208";a="246189445"
Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 16 May 2017 20:53:58 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (xch-rtp-015.cisco.com [64.101.220.155]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v4GKrwJk000798 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 16 May 2017 20:53:58 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Tue, 16 May 2017 16:53:57 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Tue, 16 May 2017 16:53:57 -0400
From: "Eric Voit (evoit)" <evoit@cisco.com>
To: Bert Wijnen <bwietf@bwijnen.net>, "yang-doctors@ietf.org" <yang-doctors@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push.all@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>, "Waltermire, David A. (Fed)" <david.waltermire@nist.gov>
Thread-Topic: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-06
Thread-Index: AQHSzkE9C/OO0NmevUiBbCVmGdSZbKH3ao5w
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 20:53:57 +0000
Message-ID: <c955ae937b4142ac949c6f7876c40cc0@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com>
References: <149493827145.11944.9758454721784881844@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <149493827145.11944.9758454721784881844@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.118.56.228]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/YffgVnfjQoS_35NPHkZNsFQw-iE>
Subject: Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-06
X-BeenThere: yang-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: email list of the yang-doctors directorate <yang-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/yang-doctors>, <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/yang-doctors/>
List-Post: <mailto:yang-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors>, <mailto:yang-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 20:58:39 -0000
Hi Bert, Thanks very much for the review. Some thoughts in-line... > From: Bert Wijnen, May 16, 2017 8:38 AM > > Reviewer: Bert Wijnen > Review result: On the Right Track > > > - last para of sect 3.5. > This seems to me to make it difficult to create interoperable > implementations. Or is there a way for a client to figure out what > is or is not support, other than tryal and error? Minimal XPATH syntax support is really a subscription independent issue. At this time, I am not aware of anyone attempting to constrain which XPATH capabilities should be the minimum set for the industry. One of the reasons is that going with a minimum common denominator for a high volume information set (like routing changes) might constrain the availability of low volume, high value filters (like configuration changes). I would very much welcome someone who wanted to attempt work in this area. As David Waltermire said to me on this topic today, it might be possible to identify a minimum XPATH filter capability set for various roles in the network element. But this is non-trivial work. For now, I am assuming any vendor will be able to articulate what the syntax capabilities are for their platforms. And they can do outside the standards arena. A good way to do this would be to pre-populate example filters in the "filters" objects. > - page 41: > > /* YANG Parser Pyang crashing on the following syntax below > > So does the definition get skipped? Or what needs to happen here? There is a coming in pyang 1.7.2 which fixes the bug... https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang/issues/300 See https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang/commit/b891cc3dd3a4547f9eddd83882e9872bc2066c6d All we need to do is await the new version. > Consistency > > - last bullet on page 7 talks about "YANG subtrees". I do not see that term > in netconf or yang documents. Those just talk about "subtrees". > Maybe I am > not looking good enough? Will remove the word YANG > - top of page 8 I see the words "xpath", "Xpath" and "XPath" > is there a difference? No. Will fix. > Nits Nice catches. Will fix the items below. Eric > - you may want to check the reference/citation occurrences of [subscribe] > at several places it points to > draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push-06#ref-subscribe > whereas I think it intends to point to the [subscribe] in the > normative references section > - first bullet on page 5: > Enhancements to filters. Specifically the filter MUST at identify at > least one targeted yang > s/at// -- the first "at" seems superfluous > plus, you are using capitalized MUST with out reference/citation of > RFC2119 > - page 36: > > leaf dependency { > type sn:subscription-id; > description > "Provides the Subscription ID of a parent subscription which > has absolute priority should that parent have push updates > ready to egress the publisher. In other words, there should be > no streaming of objects from the current subscription if of > the parent has something ready to push."; > reference > "RFC-7540, section 5.3.1"; > } > > s/if of/if/ ??
- [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of draft-… Bert Wijnen
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of dr… Mehmet Ersue
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of dr… Eric Voit (evoit)
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of dr… Andy Bierman
- Re: [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of dr… Eric Voit (evoit)