Re: comments on draft-ietf-netconf-notification-01.txt

[Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>]

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> What I am interested in is to have an easy mechanism to request that
> notifications are directed to a given session (by default 'this'
> session if we allow mixed content) and to have that request bound to
> the lifetime of the session. In other words, I am thinking of a
> subscription which establishes operational state rather than a change
> of the configuration of the device and hence <edit-config> might not
> be the primitive of choice.
>
> You are looking for ways to configure persistent notificiation
> receivers and I agree that this is essentially a configuration change
> and so <edit-config> seems to be the appropriate primitive to use.
>
> I think the first decision to take is whether the WG wants to support
> both, one, or none of the use cases

I agree, and I don't think we should be too proscriptive with netconf
regarding new operations or anything else, except to say that if a
standard approach can be use it should be used as long as it isn't so
contorted as to end up with GET/SET for side effects, as Dave pointed out.

This having been said, perhaps there is a more general approach that we
should be considering than notifications, as to ephemeral state.

Eliot

--
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/>