RE: Notification Decision Point: Named Profiles

["Sharon Chisholm" <schishol@nortel.com>]

inline 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Andy Bierman
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 10:19 AM
To: Netconf (E-mail)
Subject: Notification Decision Point: Named Profiles

<clip>
 
The use of the 'any' data type is problematic for <edit-config>, and
there is not consensus on any deterministic algorithm for processing
this operation on a data node like this, such as <filter>.  Two people
have strongly objected to usage of the 'any' data type at all in NETCONF
data models.
<sharon>
I think people are going to want to put filters in their own data models
do it would be good to resolve the expected behaviours
</sharon>

<clip>

Proposed Consensus:
 * remove no-op 'stream' element
<sharon> 
It is only a no-op because the stream in the create-subscription is
mandatory. There are two paths to resolve this
   1. Make the streams in create-subscription mutually exclusive with
named profiles (like we have done with other filter parameters) and give
it a min-occurs of 0.
   2. Delete it from named Profiles.

I think option 1 makes more sense.
</sharon>
 * declare the <edit-config> operation on the contents of the <filter>
   parameter to be 'undefined'
<sharon>
I assume this is just for the merge operation, where the issue is?
</sharon>
Comments?

thanks,
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/>

--
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/>