Hi Alex,

thanks for the reply and I see that I should have included more details. I 
understand the design (but it was confusing at first) in general because we 
have implemented YANG Push as well. However, I do not think

> you have a mandatory choice, but can select a case whose nodes are optional

applies. YANG 1.1 clearly defines [1] that some data nodes must exist in a 
mandatory choice. In this case it can be "stream-filter-name", 
"stream-subtree-filter", or "stream-xpath-filter" (clearly seen from the tree 
snippet you referenced) but I think it should be allowed to not include any of 
these. Please, provide a valid example of "modify-subscription" invocation that 
uses no filter, I could not come up with any.

In my opinion, there should be a refine on the "subscription-policy-modifiable" 
grouping in this case and change the mandatory to "false". Provided that it 
should not be allowed to change the stream of a subscription, which I guess it 
should not.

Regards,
Michal

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7950#section-7.9.4

> I am just rereading this (sorry, it's been a while since we wrote this).
> 
> When you look at the modify-subscription RPC, the "case stream" itself is 
> optional, even if the choice "target" is mandatory.  So, it is in fact 
> optional to include, no need to specify a null filter.  (However, when 
> present, then parameters of the individual choices need to be present as 
> well.)  In effect, you have a mandatory choice, but can select a case whose 
> nodes are optional.  This is depicted in the Tree Diagram here: RFC 8639: 
> Subscription to YANG Notifications 
> (rfc-editor.org)<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8639#page-16>
> 
> What may also be confusing at first is the fact that the choice "target" 
> itself has "stream" as the single case (in RFC 8639).  So, why put a choice 
> there in the first place? The reason why it is there is so that it can be 
> augmented, and RFC 8641 specifies a second case, namely "datastore".
> --- Alex
> 
> From: netmod <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Alexander Clemm
> Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 11:21 AM
> To: Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]>; Netconf <[email protected]>
> Cc: netmod <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [netmod] ietf-subscribed-notifications RPC modify-subscription
> 
> Hi,
> When you modify the subscription, you need to specify the subscription 
> parameters that you want to modify the subscription to - i.e.  the 
> subscription parameters that you want to be in effect after modifying the 
> subscription. If you want nothing to be filtered, just specify a "null" 
> filter.
> --- Alex
> 
> From: netmod <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On 
> Behalf Of Mahesh Jethanandani
> Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 10:14 AM
> To: Netconf <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Cc: netmod <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Subject: Re: [netmod] ietf-subscribed-notifications RPC modify-subscription
> 
> [Cross posting to netconf]
> 
> On Aug 3, 2021, at 6:01 AM, Michal Vaško 
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> it seems the "modify-subscription" RPC [1] includes a mandatory choice 
> "target" [2]. In effect, it is not possible to modify a subscription for it 
> to be without a filter. I do not understand the reason for this, is it 
> intentional or an error in the module?
> 
> Regards,
> Michal
> 
> [1] 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8639#page-53<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Frfc%2Frfc8639%23page-53&data=04%7C01%7Calex%40futurewei.com%7Ccbb0046e0a654512c58b08d956ab8596%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637636116962301470%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=PmSz%2FtI%2FjkbFYDu0xB%2BOuXyMoYGdwdeNNLZnP%2FEcJrY%3D&reserved=0>
> [2] 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8639#page-48<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Frfc%2Frfc8639%23page-48&data=04%7C01%7Calex%40futurewei.com%7Ccbb0046e0a654512c58b08d956ab8596%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637636116962311427%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=y2%2Bl02Gft87VlpN60LHWyrECFro2o21c%2FCIWSCnR4qw%3D&reserved=0>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fnetmod&data=04%7C01%7Calex%40futurewei.com%7Ccbb0046e0a654512c58b08d956ab8596%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637636116962311427%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=nwF%2BFtX2xAQmMO2KLolx7g8wQvfq5XGBsnSUGR2lCdU%3D&reserved=0>
> 
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> 
> 
> 
>

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to