Minutes for NETCONF at IETF-92
minutes-92-netconf-1
| Meeting Minutes | Network Configuration (netconf) WG | |
|---|---|---|
| Date and time | 2015-03-24 18:00 | |
| Title | Minutes for NETCONF at IETF-92 | |
| State | Active | |
| Other versions | plain text | |
| Last updated | 2015-03-31 |
minutes-92-netconf-1
Minutes of the Netconf WG Session in IETF 92 [2015-03-24 Tue]
=============================================================
**** Andy Bierman (AB) - RESTCONF
***** slide 5
- Juergen Schoenwaelder (JS): what happens with YANG 1.1 anydata?
- AB: If we have a standard notion of layers, it will be the the
same. It has to be defined depending on how it is defined. I
see no reason to mention YANG 1.1.
***** slide 6
- JS: Unified datastore persistence not defined, that's a problem.
- AB: NETCONF has no concept of persistence. It is a performance issue.
***** slide 7
- Dean Bogdanovic (DB): Giving the NV option is confusing. It should
be always persistent.
- AB: This exposes the option of NV-storing or not. It makes a
difference for performace-sensitive apps.
***** slide 8
- Martin Bjorklund MB): Mixing two things - URL can stay.
- AB: YANG Patch will change and this issue will go away.
- JS: Concerned about making some proto spec action that's
really not so.
- AB: We should make an effort to remove all RESTCONF-specific
stuff.
- Phil Shafer (PS): Why do you expect that not all models will be
available.
- AB: YANG modules have a lot of RPCs that are tied to sessions,
these are not supported.
- PS: RESTCONF and NETCONF should be able to get to the same
data.
- AB: That could be implementation restriction - business &
marketing decision.
***** slide 9
- Peter van Horne (PvH): It should be mandatory.
- Chairs: Take it mailing list.
***** slide 10
- JS: I2RS distinction ephemeral v. config. Unified datastore
doesn't solve this.
- Mehmet Ersue (ME): We should start WGLC ASAP.
- PS: Can you answer the q about scope?
- ME: This has to be discussed in ML
**** Andy - YANG Patch
***** slide 4
- PS: NETCONF ops not specified - should it be clarified in YANG 1.1.
- MB: It is NETCONF issue.
***** slide 6
- JS: YANG Patch is RESTCONF patch, it is part of scope
discussion. Is the server expected to translate a RESTCONF op
-> NETCONF?
- MB: Why not make it avaliable in NETCONF as well?
- AB: Pointless to use edit-config in two ways.
- PJ: You can ask the same q for unified datastore.
- I wish we used unif. datastore in NETCONF.
***** slide 14
- Kent Watsen (KW): I support using these features in NETCONF as well.
- JS: What you are doing is a new RPC, should work.
- PS: We should maximize the NC/RC overlap.
**** Andy - YANG Library
***** slide 4
- Lada Lhotka (LL): Why is the conformance leaf needed? Modules that
are used only for typedefs and groupings needn't be in YANG
library.
- Conformance should be changed to enumeration. Specially, as it relates to
'import by revision'.
- AB: YANG library contains all modules that the server
implements.
- LL: The dependence on yang-json can mean that RESTCONF and
other docs will have to wait on YANG 1.1 because of the
decision of the NETMOD WG to address anydata in yang-json.
- JS: YANG Patch is a client of anydata.
**** Andy RESTCONF Collection Resource
- Not much work done on the draft.
**** Kent - Call Home
- KW will send -05 version in couple of weeks.
- Chairs: May need a second LC.
**** Kent - server model
- 13 issues.
***** slide 10
- AB: Prefer just seconds.
- PS: Complexity breeds bugs.
***** slide 11
- MB: Is it obvious it is needed?
***** slide 15
- Mikael Abrahamsson: Why not using TCP keepalives?
- KW: Not encrypted, can be spoofed.
- PS: Is it necessary.
- KW: Usual approach in similar application.
- Jeff Hass (JH): SSH may think it is up but the application on top
of it in fact isn't. That's why keepalives are done in the app.
- ME: Is it really needed to move the whole section to CH draft?
- KW: This is about how to implement keepalives.
***** slide 16
- MB: An option would be to say MAY.
***** slide 17
- PS: Dependence on Y1.1 is not a problem.
- KW: It came from Honolulu, now it may be reasonable to use
Y1.1 features.
- 16 Y and 1 N for including YANG 1.1 features.
- ME: Rough consensus to include Y1.1 features despite possible
delays.
**** Kent - Zero Touch
***** slide 13
- ME: ANIMA requirements should be brought in as written text.
- ANIMA chair: We don't have official requirements towards NETCONF
- Michael Behringer (MB): IN ANIMA, nodes can talk to each other. We
can merge the two requirements.
**** Jeff Haas - I2RS requirements
***** slide 8
- Sue Hares (SH): we need help with ephemeral state
- Benoit Claise (BC): This is an individual draft, how is it related to
I2RS architecture?
- JH: This is arch doc translated to YANG terms. Need help with defining
ephemeral state. What it means is not clear.
- SH: Traceability and pub-sub are requiremebts, too, but we
aren't asking for help there. Would rather have a discussion that send
a set of requirements.
- Dan B, Martin, Ken and Andy to help with ephemeral state.
- ME: Propose to have a conference call in a few weeks.
- JH, SH: Support.
**** Eric Voit - pub/sub
- ME: Schedule for this work?
- EV: Not decided yet.
- JH: It has a priority.
**** Alex Clemm (AC) - Subscribing to push updates
- ME: Who read the draft? Not many. Please read the draft.
- ME: Does this draft address the pub/sub reqs fully?
- AC: It doesn't allow for alternative transport.
- ME: Should NETCONF address this? 12 yes and no no’s. Support was indicated.
**** Liu Bing - Processing multiple requests
- ME: Who read it? 5. All of them support working on this topic.
ME: Authors please seek for support on mailing list.
**** Time Stamp in NETCONF
- Ran out of time.
- ME: Authors please seek for support on mailing list.