Subject: [Netconf] comments on draft-ietf-netconf-system-notifications-02.txt

From: Martin Bjorklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 16:47:34 +0100 (CET)

Hi,

Here are my comments on this draft.  Most are pretty minor, except
maybe for the first one, which is a result of the renaming of the
draft and module since -01.

General

  The title of this draft is pretty generic:

    NETCONF Notification Events

  and it is too similar to RFC 5277:

    NETCONF Event Notifications

  Maybe the old "netconf system notifications" is better, but with an
  explanation that it refers to the netconf system.

grouping common-session-parms

  Why is user-name optional?  It is not optional in netconf
  monitoring.  I suggest it is made mandatory.

  For consistency with netconf monitoring I suggest:

    s/user-name/username/
    s/remote-host/source-host/

grouping changed-by-parms

  Could the 'server-or-user' choice be mandatory?  I.e. the events
  that use this grouping will always indicate which user and
  session-id was used, but if it is an unknown session (e.g. changed
  over snmp), session-id is zero.

notification netconf-config-change

  This is described in the text as:

      Generated when the NETCONF server detects
      that the <running> or <startup> configuration datastore has
      changed. 

  This text should also be used in the 'description' stmt in the YANG
  module.

notification netconf-config-change

  s/target-database/target-datastore/

  consistent terminology...

notification netconf-confirmed-commit

  Instead of:

    uses common-session-parms {
      refine session-id {
        mandatory false;
      }
    }
  
  Could we use:

    uses common-session-parms {
      when "../confirm-event != 'timeout'";
    }

  I think this achieves the same effect, but in a more clear way.

notification netconf-capability-change

  I think it should be stated that the modified-capability leaf-list
  lists the new capability strings.

/martin