[As a contributor]

While it's clear what this document is trying to achieve at a high level, it is 
unclear why the solution is needed.   A "motivation" section explaining why 
this should be standardized would be nice.

When reading this draft, I was reminded of my long expired draft 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kwatsen-conditional-enablement-00.  That 
draft provided a more general solution, in that it enabled sub-trees to be 
enabled/disabled for any reason.  It was primarily focused on supporting 
comments, but it did call out that expressions could include time, though it 
didn't flush out that thought to any extent.

Other than draft-kwatsen-conditional-enablement being a more generic solution, 
another difference is that this draft enables the module-designer to specify 
where in the data model the grouping is used, whereas my old draft let the 
client enabled/disabled nodes anywhere in the data model, potentially producing 
nonsensical results, though we have to assume that the server would fail any 
invalid results.

Regarding this solution, I have some specific questions:

1) why is the "schedule" node a list?  How is a list to be processed?   Are 
there any overlapping issues?

2) does the "schedule-id" leaf have any useful purpose other than being the 
list's key?

3) the "schedule-duration" node's pattern matches XSD's "duration" type, is it 
the intent to process it as such?

4) the draft-ietf-netconf-server-model draft originally had a duration-like 
value, but the WG consensus was at the time was to instead use an unsigned 
integer value with a "units" value (e.g., seconds, minutes, etc.).  The claim 
was that, when large values where needed (e.g., 3600-seconds instead of 
1-hour), that the client could always do the math.  Any thoughts on that?

5) are there any issues with the "repeat-interval" node?  I'm specifically 
thinking about the interval being expressed in terms of hours and days in the 
context of daylight savings and leap year...


Nit: some examples in the draft would've been nice.

Thanks,
Kent



_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to