Re: kill-session: editorial mistake

[Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>]

Lei Zhang wrote:

> In draft 10:
>
> 7.9.  <kill-session>
>
>   Description:
>
>      Force the termination of a NETCONF session.
>
>      When a NETCONF entity receives a <kill-session> request for an
>      open session, it will abort any operations currently in process,
>      release any locks and resources associated with the session and
>      close any associated connections.
>
>      ... ...
>
>      Otherwise, the <kill-session> operation does not roll back
>      configuration or other device state modifications made by the
>      entity holding the lock.
>
> And:
>
> 8.3.5.1.  <lock> and <unlock>
>
>   ... ... To facilitate easy
>   recovery, any outstanding changes are discarded when the lock is
>   released, whether explicitly with the <unlock> operation or
>   implicitly from session failure.
>
>
> The two sections conflict with each other. The 'otherwise' paragraph 
> of <kill-session>
> seems to be misplaced right?


No.

Sec. 7.9 is referring to changes that have been commited from <candidate>
to <running>.  If the <kill-session> occurs after the first <commit> but 
before
the second <commit>, then the agent treats the <kill-session> the same
as a dropped session, and reverts the <running> config.

Sec. 8.3.5.1 is referring to any edits pending in the <candidate> which 
have not
been committed yet. 

That sentence you highlighted says that a <discard-changes> is implicitly
performed by the agent whenever a lock on <candidate> is released.

> Thanks,
> Lei


Andy


--
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/>