Re: notification charter proposal

["Tom Petch" <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Bierman" <ietf@andybierman.com>
To: "Tom Petch" <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com>
Cc: <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: notification charter proposal


> Tom Petch wrote:
>
> >Andy
> >
> >Notifications or events, or asynchronous messages?
> >
> >As Sharon says
> >"an asynchronous message, sometimes referred to as a
> >   notification or event message"
> >
> >I get a slight sense of you and Sharon determinedly heading in different
> >directions:-(
> >
> >
> Notifications.
>
> I want to design features with a specific purpose.
> NETCONF is not a transport for arbitrary asynch messages.  We will not have
> super-loose definitions of protocol elements, so that (for example) NETCONF
> notifications could be used to carry IPFIX reports or SW downloads or
> whatever.
> I think there is something in the draft called a "one-way RPC" that I
> really disagree with.
> Once you start down the slippery slope (e.g., declaring a notification
> can be a 4 billion
> byte octet stream) then all implementations get more difficult, even
> though hardly anyone
> wants this sort of "notification feature".
>
> Andy
>
Yes, I can see that and it makes me think that there needs to be something about
that in the charter, clarifying what a notification is; otherwise, by
simultaneously adopting 'draft-chisholm-netconf-event-01.txt', I think we are
implicitly taking on board whatever that says.  I always associate the term
notification with SNMPv3 - I don't see it used elsewhere - which does not appear
to define it but implies it is asynchronous, an unsolicited transmission, an
event notification; and there is an implicit size limit because of UDP,
something NETCONF lacks.

The original charter did have asynchronous in it, which seems right to me, but I
would like something about limiting the size as well, to stop people including a
storage dump with the restart notification, but I don't have a good wording for
it - perhaps
'a notification is a brief, asynchronous message indicating that an event has
occurred'.

> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Andy Bierman" <ietf@andybierman.com>
> >To: <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
> >Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 3:27 AM
> >Subject: notification charter proposal
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>Please comment on the following charter text before it goes to the
> >>ADs for approval.
> >>
> >>thanks,
> >>Andy and Simon
> >>
> >>============================================================
> >>
> >>NETCONF WG Charter Clarification proposal:
> >>
> >>The original NETCONF WG charter contains the following line item,
> >>describing the characteristics that the protocol should have:
> >>
> >>   - Provides support for asynchronous notifications
> >>
> >>This support was removed from the protocol for several reasons, including:
> >>
> >> - Removal of multiple channels (or connections) per session
> >> - Inconsistent notification support capabilities for each application
> >>mapping
> >> - Lack of a configurable notification type selection (filtering) mechanism
> >> - Lack of consensus on feature importance
> >> - Lack of time to reach consensus on all these issues
> >>
> >>Some time has passed, and there is now WG consensus to finish this
> >>work item, however the single line in the original charter needs to
> >>be expanded and this work scoped in much more detail.
> >>
> >>The NETCONF Notification work shall consist of the following:
> >>
> >> - Specify the <hello> message (capability exchange) details to
> >>    support notifications.
> >> - Specify the application mapping details to support notifications.
> >> - Specify the protocol syntax and semantics of a notification message.
> >> - Specify a mechanism for controlling the delivery (turn on/off)
> >>   of notifications during a session.
> >> - Specify a mechanism for selectively receiving a configurable subset
> >>of all
> >>   possible notification types.
> >>
> >>An individual submission Internet Draft has been proposed to the WG
> >>as the starting point for this work.  Unless there are any strong
> >>objections or alternate proposals, the WG shall adopt the document
> >>identified as 'draft-chisholm-netconf-event-01.txt' as the starting
> >>point for this work.
> >>
> >>Goals and Milestones
> >>
> >>  Dec 05   Update charter
> >>  Jan 06   Submit first version of NETCONF Notifications document
> >>  Sep 06   Begin WGLC of NETCONF Notifications document
> >>  Dec 06   Submit final version of NETCONF Notifications document to
> >>IESG for
> >>           consideration
> >>


--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>