IETF
netconf
netconf@jabber.ietf.org
Thursday, November 16, 2017< ^ >
bclaise has set the subject to: NETCONF meeting at IETF-95
Room Configuration
Room Occupants

GMT+0
[07:44:23] meetecho joins the room
[07:45:22] Juergen Schoenwaelder joins the room
[07:50:10] Yuji Tochio joins the room
[07:51:19] Martin Björklund joins the room
[07:56:31] Andy Bierman joins the room
[07:59:41] ladislav.lhotka joins the room
[08:00:10] <meetecho> Working on the missing videos
[08:02:24] <Martin Björklund> does anyone have a link to the slides?  I can't see the video
[08:03:50] <Juergen Schoenwaelder> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/slides-100-netconf-nmda-drafts/
[08:04:10] <Martin Björklund> thx!
[08:06:16] <Martin Björklund> juergen, where did you find the link?
[08:06:47] <Yuji Tochio> Now I can see video and slides.
[08:08:36] <Juergen Schoenwaelder> data tracker agenda page, first icon next to the meeting slot, scroll to the end on the popup page
[08:09:39] <Martin Björklund> aha, missed the scrolling.
[08:10:35] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 5
[08:11:36] <ladislav.lhotka> sorry, slide 6 now
[08:11:41] <Martin Björklund> video works now
[08:12:29] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 9
[08:13:20] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 10
[08:14:01] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 11
[08:15:23] William Jensen joins the room
[08:15:27] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 12
[08:17:16] William Jensen leaves the room
[08:22:32] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 13
[08:23:14] <Martin Björklund> @mic wouldn't the datastore have a leafref to a schema?
[08:23:31] <Martin Björklund> ok, never mind, I now see the structure
[08:23:39] <Martin Björklund> no mic needed
[08:23:57] <Martin Björklund> the datastore is listed under the schema
[08:26:00] <Martin Björklund> then a leafref is needed
[08:27:02] <ladislav.lhotka> zerotouch draft - Kent
[08:27:30] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 2
[08:29:37] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 3
[08:32:04] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 4
[08:33:39] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 5
[08:35:55] <ladislav.lhotka> keystore et al. - Kent
[08:35:59] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 3
[08:37:56] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 4
[08:38:45] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 5
[08:40:23] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 6
[08:40:39] <Juergen Schoenwaelder> If a client container is useless, we should not have it. I know that LMAP needs client configuration, if the conclusion is that a generic client container is useless, then LMAP has to define its client container. I can go both ways.
[08:42:40] <ladislav.lhotka> subscription drafts - Eric
[08:43:02] mersue joins the room
[08:43:44] bclaise joins the room
[08:43:56] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 2
[08:44:07] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 3
[08:44:53] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 4
[08:45:16] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 5
[08:47:00] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 6
[08:48:29] <Martin Björklund> i'm fine with varying per reciever, but the issue is around transport/encoding
[08:48:45] <Martin Björklund> IMO they go together
[08:49:41] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 7
[08:53:12] <Martin Björklund> I agree w/ Rob's proposal
[08:55:06] <Juergen Schoenwaelder> What is the cost of the import in running code?
[08:55:52] <Martin Björklund> Agree we should ask for guideance from rtgwg
[08:56:33] <Martin Björklund> I also don't understand the dependency issue
[08:57:11] <Martin Björklund> The fact is that there *is* a dependency, if you need a VRF
[08:58:56] <Martin Björklund> you can also augment the vrf leaf from a separate (very small ) module, to avoid the impoiort
[08:59:11] <Juergen Schoenwaelder> The import is irrelevant for the code on the IoT device.
[09:00:00] <Martin Björklund> but I agree w/ the compile-time comments; this shouldn't be a problem.
[09:04:27] <Juergen Schoenwaelder> The question how to deal with VRFs has come up in different drafts; ideally there would be a common pattern, it is bad if every data model picks its own solution.
[09:05:12] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 8
[09:05:29] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 9
[09:06:31] <Martin Björklund> @juergen I agree.  if every model defines it's own feature "support-vrf" that would be bad.  I wish we had "if-module-is-implemented" in addition to "if-feature"
[09:07:29] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 10
[09:11:37] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 11
[09:15:02] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 12
[09:16:20] <Martin Björklund> what transports have people implemented?
[09:16:20] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 13
[09:20:01] <ladislav.lhotka> distributed data collection
[09:21:19] <ladislav.lhotka> I cannot find the slides
[09:22:40] <ladislav.lhotka> Apparently they are not included in the agenda
[09:28:12] Juergen Schoenwaelder leaves the room
[09:30:23] <ladislav.lhotka> automation framework - xufeng
[09:30:34] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 2
[09:31:43] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 4
[09:31:52] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 5
[09:32:43] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 7
[09:32:50] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 8
[09:36:27] <ladislav.lhotka> telemetry over coreconf - xufeng
[09:36:38] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 2
[09:37:47] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 3
[09:40:24] mersue leaves the room
[09:40:36] <ladislav.lhotka> smart filters for push updates - alex
[09:40:49] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 2
[09:42:10] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 3
[09:42:13] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 4
[09:43:59] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 7
[09:45:10] <Martin Björklund> do you have any solution proposal?
[09:45:17] <Martin Björklund> it would be interesting to see
[09:45:23] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 8
[09:50:03] <ladislav.lhotka> discrepancy detection between datastores - alex
[09:50:08] <ladislav.lhotka> slide 2
[09:51:55] <Martin Björklund> support wg adoption
[09:53:20] Andy Bierman leaves the room
[09:53:53] Yuji Tochio leaves the room
[09:53:56] Martin Björklund leaves the room
[09:57:00] meetecho leaves the room
[10:04:22] ladislav.lhotka leaves the room: Disconnected: closed
[10:46:00] bclaise leaves the room