draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-22.txt   rfc8640.txt 
NETCONF E. Voit Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) E. Voit
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems Request for Comments: 8640 Cisco Systems
Intended status: Standards Track A. Clemm Category: Standards Track A. Clemm
Expires: November 20, 2019 Huawei ISSN: 2070-1721 Futurewei
A. Gonzalez Prieto A. Gonzalez Prieto
Microsoft Microsoft
E. Nilsen-Nygaard E. Nilsen-Nygaard
A. Tripathy A. Tripathy
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
May 19, 2019 September 2019
Dynamic subscription to YANG Events and Datastores over NETCONF Dynamic Subscription to YANG Events and Datastores over NETCONF
draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-event-notifications-22
Abstract Abstract
This document provides a Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) This document provides a Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)
binding to the dynamic subscription capability of both subscribed binding to the dynamic subscription capability of both subscribed
notifications and YANG-Push. notifications and YANG-Push.
RFC Editor note: please replace the references to pre-RFC normative
drafts with the actual assigned RFC numbers.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This is an Internet Standards Track document.
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 20, 2019. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8640.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 26 skipping to change at page 3, line 7
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English. than English.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology .....................................................3
3. Compatibility with RFC-5277's create-subscription . . . . . . 3 3. Compatibility with <create-subscription> as Defined in
4. Mandatory XML, event stream and datastore support . . . . . . 4 RFC 5277 ........................................................4
5. NETCONF connectivity and the Dynamic Subscriptions . . . . . 4 4. Mandatory XML, Event Stream, and Datastore Support ..............4
6. Notification Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. NETCONF Connectivity and Dynamic Subscriptions ..................4
7. Dynamic Subscriptions and RPC Error Responses . . . . . . . . 5 6. Notification Messages ...........................................5
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Dynamic Subscriptions and RPC Error Responses ...................5
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Security Considerations .........................................7
10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. IANA Considerations .............................................7
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 10. References .....................................................7
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 10.1. Normative References ......................................7
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 10.2. Informative References ....................................8
Appendix A. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Appendix A. Examples ...............................................9
A.1. Event Stream Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 A.1. Event Stream Discovery ......................................9
A.2. Dynamic Subscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 A.2. Dynamic Subscriptions ......................................10
A.3. Subscription State Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 A.3. Subscription State Notifications ...........................15
A.4. Filter Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 A.4. Filter Examples ............................................17
Appendix B. Changes between revisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Acknowledgments ...................................................19
B.1. v21 to v22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Authors' Addresses ................................................19
B.2. v20 to v21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
B.3. v19 to v20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
B.4. v17 to v19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
B.5. v16 to v17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
B.6. v15 to v16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
B.7. v14 to v15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
B.8. v13 to v14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
B.9. v11 to v13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
B.10. v10 to v11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
B.11. v09 to v10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
B.12. v08 to v09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
B.13. v07 to v08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
B.14. v06 to v07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
B.15. v05 to v06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
B.16. v03 to v04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
B.17. v01 to v03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
B.18. v00 to v01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document specifies the binding of a stream of events which form This document specifies the binding of a stream of events that form
part of a dynamic subscription to the NETCONF protocol [RFC6241]. part of a dynamic subscription to the Network Configuration Protocol
Dynamic subscriptions are defined in (NETCONF) [RFC6241]. Dynamic subscriptions are defined in [RFC8639].
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications]. In addition, as In addition, as [RFC8641] is itself built upon [RFC8639], this
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push] is itself built upon document enables a NETCONF client to request via a dynamic
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications], this document subscription, and receive, updates from a YANG datastore located on a
enables a NETCONF client to request via a dynamic subscription and NETCONF server.
receive updates from a YANG datastore located on a NETCONF server.
This document assumes that the reader is familiar with the This document assumes that the reader is familiar with the
terminology and concepts defined in terminology and concepts defined in [RFC8639].
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications].
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here. capitals, as shown here.
The following terms are defined in The following terms are defined in [RFC8639]: dynamic subscription,
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications]: dynamic event stream, notification message, publisher, receiver, subscriber,
subscription, event stream, notification message, publisher, and subscription. This document does not define any additional
receiver, subscriber, subscription. No additional terms are defined. terms.
3. Compatibility with RFC-5277's create-subscription 3. Compatibility with <create-subscription> as Defined in RFC 5277
A publisher is allowed to concurrently support dynamic subscription A publisher is allowed to concurrently support dynamic subscription
RPCs of [I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] at the same RPCs as defined in [RFC8639] at the same time as the
time as [RFC5277]'s "create-subscription" RPC. However a single <create-subscription> RPC defined in [RFC5277]. However, a single
NETCONF transport session MUST NOT support both this specification NETCONF transport session MUST NOT support both this specification
and a subscription established by [RFC5277]'s "create-subscription" and a subscription established by the <create-subscription> RPC
RPC. To protect against any attempts to use a single NETCONF defined in [RFC5277]. To protect against any attempts to use a
transport session in this way: single NETCONF transport session in this way:
o A solution MUST reply with the [RFC6241] "rpc-error" element o A solution MUST reply with the <rpc-error> element [RFC6241]
containing the "error-tag" value of "operation-not-supported" if a containing the "error-tag" value of "operation-not-supported" if a
"create-subscription" RPC is received on a NETCONF session where <create-subscription> RPC is received on a NETCONF session where
an [I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] established an established subscription per [RFC8639] exists.
subscription exists.
o A solution MUST reply with the [RFC6241] "rpc-error" element o A solution MUST reply with the <rpc-error> element [RFC6241]
containing the "error-tag" value of "operation-not-supported" if containing the "error-tag" value of "operation-not-supported" if
an "establish-subscription" request has been received on a NETCONF an "establish-subscription" request has been received on a NETCONF
session where the "create-subscription" RPC has successfully session where the <create-subscription> RPC [RFC5277] has
[RFC5277] created a subscription. successfully created a subscription.
If a publisher supports this specification but not subscriptions via If a publisher supports this specification but not subscriptions via
[RFC5277], the publisher MUST NOT advertise [RFC5277], the publisher MUST NOT advertise
"urn:ietf:params:netconf:capability:notification:1.0". "urn:ietf:params:netconf:capability:notification:1.0".
4. Mandatory XML, event stream and datastore support 4. Mandatory XML, Event Stream, and Datastore Support
The "encode-xml" feature of The "encode-xml" feature of [RFC8639] MUST be supported. This
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] MUST be supported. indicates that XML is a valid encoding for RPCs, state change
This indicates that XML is a valid encoding for RPCs, state change
notifications, and subscribed content. notifications, and subscribed content.
A NETCONF publisher supporting event stream subscription via A NETCONF publisher supporting event stream subscription via
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] MUST support the [RFC8639] MUST support the "NETCONF" event stream identified in that
"NETCONF" event stream identified in that document. document.
5. NETCONF connectivity and the Dynamic Subscriptions 5. NETCONF Connectivity and Dynamic Subscriptions
Management of dynamic subscriptions occurs via RPCs as defined in Management of dynamic subscriptions occurs via RPCs as defined in
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push] and [RFC8641] and [RFC8639]. For a dynamic subscription, if the NETCONF
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications]. For a dynamic session involved with the "establish-subscription" terminates, the
subscription, if the NETCONF session involved with the "establish- subscription MUST be terminated.
subscription" terminates, the subscription MUST be terminated.
For a dynamic subscription, any "modify-subscription", "delete- For a dynamic subscription, any "modify-subscription",
subscription", or "resync-subscription" RPCs MUST be sent using the "delete-subscription", or "resync-subscription" RPCs MUST be sent
same NETCONF session upon which the referenced subscription was using the same NETCONF session upon which the referenced subscription
established. was established.
6. Notification Messages 6. Notification Messages
Notification messages transported over the NETCONF protocol MUST be Notification messages transported over NETCONF MUST be encoded in a
encoded in a <notification> message as defined within [RFC5277], <notification> message as defined in [RFC5277], Section 4. And per
Section 4. And per [RFC5277]'s "eventTime" object definition, the the <eventTime> object definition provided in [RFC5277], <eventTime>
"eventTime" is populated with the event occurrence time. is populated with the event occurrence time.
For dynamic subscriptions, all notification messages MUST use the For dynamic subscriptions, all notification messages MUST use the
NETCONF transport session used by the "establish-subscription" RPC. NETCONF transport session used by the "establish-subscription" RPC.
7. Dynamic Subscriptions and RPC Error Responses 7. Dynamic Subscriptions and RPC Error Responses
When an RPC error occurs as defined in When an RPC error occurs as defined in [RFC8639], Section 2.4.6 and
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] Section 2.4.6 and [RFC8641], Appendix A, the NETCONF RPC reply MUST include an
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push] Appendix A, the NETCONF RPC reply <rpc-error> element per [RFC6241] with the error information
MUST include an "rpc-error" element per [RFC6241] with the error populated as follows:
information populated as follows:
o An "error-type" node of "application". o An "error-type" node of "application".
o An "error-tag" node with the value being a string that corresponds
o An "error-tag" node, where the value is a string that corresponds
to an identity associated with the error. For the mechanisms to an identity associated with the error. For the mechanisms
specified in this document, this "error-tag" will come from one of specified in this document, this "error-tag" will correspond to
two places. Either it will correspond to the error identities the error identities in either (1) [RFC8639], Section 2.4.6, for
within [I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] section general subscription errors:
2.4.6 for general subscription errors:
error identity uses error-tag error identity uses error-tag
---------------------- -------------- ---------------------- -----------------------
dscp-unavailable invalid-value dscp-unavailable invalid-value
encoding-unsupported invalid-value encoding-unsupported invalid-value
filter-unsupported invalid-value filter-unsupported invalid-value
insufficient-resources resource-denied insufficient-resources resource-denied
no-such-subscription invalid-value no-such-subscription invalid-value
replay-unsupported operation-not-supported replay-unsupported operation-not-supported
Or this "error-tag" will correspond to the error identities within or (2) [RFC8641], Appendix A.1, for subscription errors specific
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push] Appendix A.1 for subscription to YANG datastores:
errors specific to YANG datastores:
error identity uses error-tag error identity uses error-tag
---------------------- -------------- --------------------------- -----------------------
cant-exclude operation-not-supported cant-exclude operation-not-supported
datastore-not-subscribable invalid-value datastore-not-subscribable invalid-value
no-such-subscription-resync invalid-value no-such-subscription-resync invalid-value
on-change-unsupported operation-not-supported on-change-unsupported operation-not-supported
on-change-sync-unsupported operation-not-supported on-change-sync-unsupported operation-not-supported
period-unsupported invalid-value period-unsupported invalid-value
update-too-big too-big update-too-big too-big
sync-too-big too-big sync-too-big too-big
unchanging-selection operation-failed unchanging-selection operation-failed
o an "error-severity" of "error" (this MAY be included). o An "error-severity" of "error" (this MAY be included).
o an "error-app-tag" node with the value being a string that
o An "error-app-tag" node, where the value is a string that
corresponds to an identity associated with the error, as defined corresponds to an identity associated with the error, as defined
in [I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] section 2.4.6 in [RFC8639], Section 2.4.6 for general subscriptions and
for general subscriptions, and [I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push] [RFC8641], Appendix A.1 for datastore subscriptions. The specific
Appendix A.1, for datastore subscriptions. The specific identity identity to use depends on the RPC for which the error occurred.
to use depends on the RPC for which the error occurred. Each Each error identity will be inserted as the "error-app-tag"
error identity will be inserted as the "error-app-tag" following following the form <modulename>:<identityname>. An example of
the form <modulename>:<identityname>. An example of such as valid such a valid encoding would be
encoding would be "ietf-subscribed-notifications:no-such- "ietf-subscribed-notifications:no-such-subscription". Viable
subscription". Viable errors for different RPCs are as follows: errors for different RPCs are as follows:
RPC have base identity RPC has base identity
---------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------- ----------------------------
establish-subscription establish-subscription-error establish-subscription establish-subscription-error
modify-subscription modify-subscription-error modify-subscription modify-subscription-error
delete-subscription delete-subscription-error delete-subscription delete-subscription-error
kill-subscription delete-subscription-error kill-subscription delete-subscription-error
resync-subscription resync-subscription-error resync-subscription resync-subscription-error
o In case of error responses to an "establish-subscription" or o In the case of error responses to an "establish-subscription" or
"modify-subscription" request there is the option of including an "modify-subscription" request, there is the option of including an
"error-info" node. This node may contain XML-encoded data with "error-info" node. This node may contain XML-encoded data with
hints for parameter settings that might lead to successful RPC hints for parameter settings that might lead to successful RPC
requests in the future. Following are the yang-data structures requests in the future. The yang-data structures from [RFC8639]
from [I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] and and [RFC8641] that may be returned are as follows:
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push] which may be returned:
establish-subscription returns hints in yang-data structure establish-subscription returns hints in yang-data structure
---------------------- ------------------------------------ ---------------------- -------------------------------------------
target: event stream establish-subscription-stream-error-info target: event stream establish-subscription-stream-error-info
target: datastore establish-subscription-datastore-error-info target: datastore establish-subscription-datastore-error-info
modify-subscription returns hints in yang-data structure modify-subscription returns hints in yang-data structure
---------------------- ------------------------------------ ---------------------- ----------------------------------------
target: event stream modify-subscription-stream-error-info target: event stream modify-subscription-stream-error-info
target: datastore modify-subscription-datastore-error-info target: datastore modify-subscription-datastore-error-info
The yang-data included within "error-info" SHOULD NOT include the The yang-data included in "error-info" SHOULD NOT include the
optional leaf "reason", as such a leaf would be redundant optional leaf "reason", as such a leaf would be redundant with
with information that is already placed within the information that is already placed in the "error-app-tag".
"error-app-tag".
In case of an rpc error resulting from a "delete-subscription", In the case of an RPC error resulting from a "delete-subscription",
"kill-subscription", or "resync-subscription" request, no "error- "kill-subscription", or "resync-subscription" request, no
info" needs to be included, as the "subscription-id" is the only RPC "error-info" needs to be included, as the "subscription-id" is the
input parameter and no hints regarding this RPC input parameters need only RPC input parameter and no hints regarding this RPC input
to be provided. parameter need to be provided.
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce additional Security Considerations This document does not introduce additional security considerations
for dynamic subscriptions beyond those discussed in for dynamic subscriptions beyond those discussed in [RFC8639]. But
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications]. But there is one there is one consideration worthy of more refinement based on the
consideration worthy of more refinement based on the connection connection-oriented nature of NETCONF. Specifically, if a buggy or
oriented nature of the NETCONF protocol. Specifically, if a buggy or
compromised NETCONF subscriber sends a number of "establish- compromised NETCONF subscriber sends a number of "establish-
subscription" requests, then these subscriptions accumulate and may subscription" requests, then these subscriptions accumulate and may
use up system resources. In such a situation, subscriptions MAY be use up system resources. In such a situation, subscriptions MAY be
terminated by terminating the underlying NETCONF session. The terminated by terminating the underlying NETCONF session. The
publisher MAY also suspend or terminate a subset of the active publisher MAY also suspend or terminate a subset of the active
subscriptions on that NETCONF session in order to reclaim resources subscriptions on that NETCONF session in order to reclaim resources
and preserve normal operation for the other subscriptions. and preserve normal operation for the other subscriptions.
9. IANA Considerations 9. IANA Considerations
This document has no actions for IANA. This document has no IANA actions.
10. Acknowledgments
We wish to acknowledge the helpful contributions, comments, and
suggestions that were received from: Andy Bierman, Yan Gang, Sharon
Chisholm, Hector Trevino, Peipei Guo, Susan Hares, Tim Jenkins,
Balazs Lengyel, Martin Bjorklund, Mahesh Jethanandani, Kent Watsen,
Qin Wu, and Guangying Zheng.
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] 10. References
Voit, E., Clemm, A., Gonzalez Prieto, A., Tripathy, A.,
and E. Nilsen-Nygaard, "Customized Subscriptions to a
Publisher's Event Streams", September 2018,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/
draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications/>.
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push] 10.1. Normative References
Clemm, Alexander., Voit, Eric., Gonzalez Prieto, Alberto.,
Tripathy, A., Nilsen-Nygaard, E., Bierman, A., and B.
Lengyel, "YANG Datastore Subscription", September 2018,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/
draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push/>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5277] Chisholm, S. and H. Trevino, "NETCONF Event [RFC5277] Chisholm, S. and H. Trevino, "NETCONF Event
Notifications", RFC 5277, DOI 10.17487/RFC5277, July 2008, Notifications", RFC 5277, DOI 10.17487/RFC5277, July 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5277>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5277>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
11.2. Informative References [RFC8639] Voit, E., Clemm, A., Gonzalez Prieto, A., Nilsen-Nygaard,
E., and A. Tripathy, "Subscription to YANG Notifications",
RFC 8639, DOI 10.17487/RFC8639, September 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8639>.
[RFC8641] Clemm, A. and E. Voit, "Subscription to YANG Notifications
for Datastore Updates", RFC 8641, DOI 10.17487/RFC8641,
September 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8641>.
[W3C.REC-xml-20081126]
Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, M., Maler, E., and
F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth
Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation
REC-xml-20081126, November 2008,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126>.
10.2. Informative References
[RFC8347] Liu, X., Ed., Kyparlis, A., Parikh, R., Lindem, A., and M. [RFC8347] Liu, X., Ed., Kyparlis, A., Parikh, R., Lindem, A., and M.
Zhang, "A YANG Data Model for the Virtual Router Zhang, "A YANG Data Model for the Virtual Router
Redundancy Protocol (VRRP)", RFC 8347, Redundancy Protocol (VRRP)", RFC 8347,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8347, March 2018, DOI 10.17487/RFC8347, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8347>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8347>.
[XPATH] Clark, J. and S. DeRose, "XML Path Language (XPath) [XPATH] Clark, J. and S. DeRose, "XML Path Language (XPath)
Version 1.0", November 1999, Version 1.0", November 1999,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116>. <https://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116>.
Appendix A. Examples Appendix A. Examples
This section is non-normative. Additionally the subscription "id" This appendix is non-normative. Additionally, the subscription "id"
values of 22, 23, and 39 used below are just examples. In values of 22, 23, 39, and 99 used below are just examples. In
production, the actual values of "id" may not be small integers. production, the actual values of "id" might not be small integers.
A.1. Event Stream Discovery A.1. Event Stream Discovery
As defined in [I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] an As defined in [RFC8639], an event stream exposes a continuous set of
event stream exposes a continuous set of events available for events available for subscription. A NETCONF client can retrieve the
subscription. A NETCONF client can retrieve the list of available list of available event streams from a NETCONF publisher using the
event streams from a NETCONF publisher using the "get" operation <get> operation against the top-level "streams" container defined in
against the top-level container "/streams" defined in [RFC8639], Section 3.1.
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications] Section 3.1.
The following example illustrates the retrieval of the list of The following XML example [W3C.REC-xml-20081126] illustrates the
available event streams: retrieval of the list of available event streams:
<rpc message-id="101" <rpc message-id="101"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<get> <get>
<filter type="subtree"> <filter type="subtree">
<streams <streams
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"/> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"/>
</filter> </filter>
</get> </get>
</rpc> </rpc>
Figure 1: Get streams request Figure 1: <get> Request for Retrieval of Event Streams
After such a request, the NETCONF publisher returns a list of event After such a request, the NETCONF publisher returns a list of
streams available, as well as additional information which might available event streams as well as additional information that might
exist in the container. exist in the container.
A.2. Dynamic Subscriptions A.2. Dynamic Subscriptions
A.2.1. Establishing Dynamic Subscriptions A.2.1. Establishing Dynamic Subscriptions
The following figure shows two successful "establish-subscription" Figure 2 shows two successful "establish-subscription" RPC requests
RPC requests as per as per [RFC8639]. The first request is given a subscription "id"
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications]. The first request of 22, and the second is given an "id" of 23.
is given a subscription "id" of 22, the second, an "id" of 23.
+------------+ +-----------+ +------------+ +-----------+
| Subscriber | | Publisher | | Subscriber | | Publisher |
+------------+ +-----------+ +------------+ +-----------+
| | | |
| Capability Exchange | | Capability Exchange |
|<---------------------------->| |<---------------------------->|
| | | |
| | | |
| establish-subscription | | establish-subscription |
|----------------------------->| (a) |----------------------------->| (a)
| RPC Reply: OK, id = 22 | | RPC Reply: OK, id = 22 |
|<-----------------------------| (b) |<-----------------------------| (b)
| | | |
| notification message (for 22)| | notification message (for 22)|
|<-----------------------------| |<-----------------------------|
| | | |
| | | |
| establish-subscription | | establish-subscription |
|----------------------------->| |----------------------------->|
| notification message (for 22)| | notification message (for 22)|
|<-----------------------------| |<-----------------------------|
| RPC Reply: OK, id = 23 | | RPC Reply: OK, id = 23 |
|<-----------------------------| |<-----------------------------|
| | | |
| | | |
| notification message (for 22)| | notification message (for 22)|
|<-----------------------------| |<-----------------------------|
| notification message (for 23)| | notification message (for 23)|
|<-----------------------------| |<-----------------------------|
| | | |
Figure 2: Multiple subscriptions over a NETCONF session Figure 2: Multiple Subscriptions over a NETCONF Session
To provide examples of the information being transported, example To provide examples of the information being transported, example
messages for interactions (a) and (b) in Figure 2 are detailed below: messages for interactions (a) and (b) in Figure 2 are detailed below
(Figures 3 and 4):
<rpc message-id="102" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> <rpc message-id="102" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<establish-subscription <establish-subscription
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications">
<stream-xpath-filter xmlns:ex="http://example.com/events"> <stream-xpath-filter xmlns:ex="https://example.com/events">
/ex:foo/ /ex:foo/
</stream-xpath-filter> </stream-xpath-filter>
<stream>NETCONF</stream> <stream>NETCONF</stream>
<dscp>10</dscp> <dscp>10</dscp>
</establish-subscription> </establish-subscription>
</rpc> </rpc>
Figure 3: establish-subscription request (a) Figure 3: "establish-subscription" Request (a)
As NETCONF publisher was able to fully satisfy the request (a), the As the NETCONF publisher was able to fully satisfy the request (a),
publisher sends the subscription "id" of the accepted subscription the publisher sends the subscription "id" of the accepted
within message (b): subscription in its reply message (b):
<rpc-reply message-id="102" <rpc-reply message-id="102"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<id <id
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications">
22 22
</id> </id>
</rpc-reply> </rpc-reply>
Figure 4: establish-subscription success (b) Figure 4: A Successful "establish-subscription" (b)
If the NETCONF publisher had not been able to fully satisfy the If the NETCONF publisher had not been able to fully satisfy the
request, or subscriber has no authorization to establish the request or the subscriber has no authorization to establish the
subscription, the publisher would have sent an RPC error response. subscription, the publisher would have sent an RPC error response.
For instance, if the "dscp" value of 10 asserted by the subscriber in For instance, if the "dscp" value of 10 asserted by the subscriber in
Figure 3 proved unacceptable, the publisher may have returned: Figure 3 proved unacceptable, the publisher may have returned:
<rpc-reply message-id="102" <rpc-reply message-id="102"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<rpc-error> <rpc-error>
<error-type>application</error-type> <error-type>application</error-type>
<error-tag>invalid-value</error-tag> <error-tag>invalid-value</error-tag>
<error-severity>error</error-severity> <error-severity>error</error-severity>
<error-app-tag> <error-app-tag>
ietf-subscribed-notifications:dscp-unavailable ietf-subscribed-notifications:dscp-unavailable
</error-app-tag> </error-app-tag>
</rpc-error> </rpc-error>
</rpc-reply> </rpc-reply>
Figure 5: an unsuccessful establish subscription Figure 5: An Unsuccessful "establish-subscription"
The subscriber can use this information in future attempts to The subscriber can use this information in future attempts to
establish a subscription. establish a subscription.
A.2.2. Modifying Dynamic Subscriptions A.2.2. Modifying Dynamic Subscriptions
An existing subscription may be modified. The following exchange An existing subscription may be modified. The following exchange
shows a negotiation of such a modification via several exchanges shows a negotiation of such a modification via several exchanges
between a subscriber and a publisher. This negotiation consists of a between a subscriber and a publisher. This negotiation consists of a
failed RPC modification request/response, followed by a successful failed RPC modification request/response followed by a
one. successful one.
+------------+ +-----------+ +------------+ +-----------+
| Subscriber | | Publisher | | Subscriber | | Publisher |
+------------+ +-----------+ +------------+ +-----------+
| | | |
| notification message (for 23)| | notification message (for 23)|
|<-----------------------------| |<-----------------------------|
| | | |
| modify-subscription (id = 23)| | modify-subscription (id = 23)|
|----------------------------->| (c) |----------------------------->| (c)
| RPC error (with hint) | | RPC error (with hint) |
|<-----------------------------| (d) |<-----------------------------| (d)
| | | |
| modify-subscription (id = 23)| | modify-subscription (id = 23)|
|----------------------------->| |----------------------------->|
| RPC Reply: OK | | RPC Reply: OK |
|<-----------------------------| |<-----------------------------|
| | | |
| notification message (for 23)| | notification message (for 23)|
|<-----------------------------| |<-----------------------------|
| | | |
Figure 6: Interaction model for successful subscription modification Figure 6: Interaction Model for Successful Subscription Modification
If the subscription being modified in Figure 6 is a datastore If the subscription being modified in Figure 6 is a datastore
subscription as per [I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push], the subscription as per [RFC8641], the modification request made in (c)
modification request made in (c) may look like that shown in may look like that shown in Figure 7. As can be seen, the
Figure 7. As can be seen, the modifications being attempted are the modifications being attempted are the application of a new XPath
application of a new XPath filter as well as the setting of a new filter as well as the setting of a new periodic time interval.
periodic time interval.
<rpc message-id="303" <rpc message-id="303"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<modify-subscription <modify-subscription
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"
xmlns:yp="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-push"> xmlns:yp="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-push">
<id>23</id> <id>23</id>
<yp:datastore-xpath-filter xmlns:ex="http://example.com/datastore"> <yp:datastore-xpath-filter xmlns:ex="https://example.com/datastore">
/ex:foo/ex:bar /ex:foo/ex:bar
</yp:datastore-xpath-filter> </yp:datastore-xpath-filter>
<yp:periodic> <yp:periodic>
<yp:period>500</yp:period> <yp:period>500</yp:period>
</yp:periodic> </yp:periodic>
</modify-subscription> </modify-subscription>
</rpc> </rpc>
Figure 7: Subscription modification request (c) Figure 7: Subscription Modification Request (c)
If the NETCONF publisher can satisfy both changes, the publisher If the NETCONF publisher can satisfy both changes, the publisher
sends a positive result for the RPC. If the NETCONF publisher cannot sends a positive result for the RPC. If the NETCONF publisher cannot
satisfy either of the proposed changes, the publisher sends an RPC satisfy either of the proposed changes, the publisher sends an RPC
error response (d). The following is an example RPC error response error response (d). Figure 8 shows an example RPC error response for
for (d) which includes a hint. This hint is an alternative time (d) that includes a hint. This hint is an alternative time period
period value which might have resulted in a successful modification: value that might have resulted in a successful modification:
<rpc-reply message-id="303" <rpc-reply message-id="303"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<rpc-error> <rpc-error>
<error-type>application</error-type> <error-type>application</error-type>
<error-tag>invalid-value</error-tag> <error-tag>invalid-value</error-tag>
<error-severity>error</error-severity> <error-severity>error</error-severity>
<error-app-tag> <error-app-tag>
ietf-yang-push:period-unsupported ietf-yang-push:period-unsupported
</error-app-tag> </error-app-tag>
skipping to change at page 13, line 32 skipping to change at page 14, line 32
<modify-subscription-datastore-error-info <modify-subscription-datastore-error-info
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-push"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-yang-push">
<period-hint> <period-hint>
3000 3000
</period-hint> </period-hint>
</modify-subscription-datastore-error-info> </modify-subscription-datastore-error-info>
</error-info> </error-info>
</rpc-error> </rpc-error>
</rpc-reply> </rpc-reply>
Figure 8: Modify subscription failure with hint (d) Figure 8: "modify-subscription" Failure with Hint (d)
A.2.3. Deleting Dynamic Subscriptions A.2.3. Deleting Dynamic Subscriptions
The following demonstrates deleting a subscription. This Figure 9 demonstrates the deletion of a subscription. This
subscription may have been to either a stream or a datastore. subscription may have been to either a stream or a datastore.
<rpc message-id="103" <rpc message-id="103"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<delete-subscription <delete-subscription
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications">
<id>22</id> <id>22</id>
</delete-subscription> </delete-subscription>
</rpc> </rpc>
Figure 9: Delete subscription Figure 9: "delete-subscription"
If the NETCONF publisher can satisfy the request, the publisher If the NETCONF publisher can satisfy the request, the publisher
replies with success to the RPC request. returns a reply indicating success.
If the NETCONF publisher cannot satisfy the request, the publisher If the NETCONF publisher cannot satisfy the request, the publisher
sends an error-rpc element indicating the modification didn't work. sends an <rpc-error> element indicating that the modification didn't
Figure 10 shows a valid response for existing valid subscription work. Figure 10 shows a valid response for an existing valid
"id", but that subscription "id" was created on a different NETCONF subscription "id", but that subscription "id" was created on a
transport session: different NETCONF transport session:
<rpc-reply message-id="103" <rpc-reply message-id="103"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<rpc-error> <rpc-error>
<error-type>application</error-type> <error-type>application</error-type>
<error-tag>invalid-value</error-tag> <error-tag>invalid-value</error-tag>
<error-severity>error</error-severity> <error-severity>error</error-severity>
<error-app-tag> <error-app-tag>
ietf-subscribed-notifications:no-such-subscription ietf-subscribed-notifications:no-such-subscription
</error-app-tag> </error-app-tag>
</rpc-error> </rpc-error>
</rpc-reply> </rpc-reply>
Figure 10: Unsuccessful delete subscription Figure 10: An Unsuccessful "delete-subscription"
A.3. Subscription State Notifications A.3. Subscription State Notifications
A publisher will send subscription state notifications for dynamic A publisher will send subscription state notifications for dynamic
subscriptions according to the definitions within subscriptions according to the definitions in [RFC8639].
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications].
A.3.1. subscription-modified A.3.1. "subscription-modified"
As per Section 2.7.2 of As per Section 2.7.2 of [RFC8639], a "subscription-modified" might be
[I-D.draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-notifications], a "subscription- sent over NETCONF if the definition of a configured filter changes.
modified" might be sent over NETCONF if the definition of a A subscription state notification encoded in XML would look like:
configured filter changes. A subscription state notification encoded
in XML would look like:
<notification xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0"> <notification xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0">
<eventTime>2007-09-01T10:00:00Z</eventTime> <eventTime>2007-09-01T10:00:00Z</eventTime>
<subscription-modified <subscription-modified
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications">
<id>39</id> <id>39</id>
<stream-xpath-filter xmlns:ex="http://example.com/events"> <stream-xpath-filter xmlns:ex="https://example.com/events">
/ex:foo /ex:foo
</stream-xpath-filter> </stream-xpath-filter>
<stream>NETCONF</stream> <stream>NETCONF</stream>
</subscription-modified> </subscription-modified>
</notification> </notification>
Figure 11: subscription-modified subscription state notification Figure 11: "subscription-modified" Subscription State Notification
A.3.2. subscription-resumed, and replay-complete A.3.2. "subscription-resumed" and "replay-complete"
A "subscription-resumed" would look like: A "subscription-resumed" would look like:
<notification <notification
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0">
<eventTime>2007-09-01T10:00:00Z</eventTime> <eventTime>2007-09-01T10:00:00Z</eventTime>
<subscription-resumed <subscription-resumed
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications">
<id>39</id> <id>39</id>
</subscription-resumed> </subscription-resumed>
</notification> </notification>
Figure 12: subscription-resumed notification in XML Figure 12: "subscription-resumed" Notification
The "replay-complete" is virtually identical, with "subscription- The "replay-complete" is virtually identical, with "subscription-
resumed" simply being replaced by "replay-complete". resumed" simply being replaced by "replay-complete".
A.3.3. subscription-terminated and subscription-suspended A.3.3. "subscription-terminated" and "subscription-suspended"
A "subscription-terminated" would look like: A "subscription-terminated" would look like:
<notification <notification
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0">
<eventTime>2007-09-01T10:00:00Z</eventTime> <eventTime>2007-09-01T10:00:00Z</eventTime>
<subscription-terminated <subscription-terminated
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications">
<id>39</id> <id>39</id>
<reason> <reason>
suspension-timeout suspension-timeout
</reason> </reason>
</subscription-terminated> </subscription-terminated>
</notification> </notification>
Figure 13: subscription-terminated subscription state notification Figure 13: "subscription-terminated" Subscription State Notification
The "subscription-suspended" is virtually identical, with The "subscription-suspended" is virtually identical, with
"subscription-terminated" simply being replaced by "subscription- "subscription-terminated" simply being replaced by "subscription-
suspended". suspended".
A.4. Filter Examples A.4. Filter Examples
This section provides examples which illustrate both XPath and This appendix provides examples that illustrate both XPath and
subtree methods of filtering event record contents. The examples are subtree methods of filtering event record contents. The examples are
based on the YANG notification "vrrp-protocol-error-event" as defined based on the YANG notification "vrrp-protocol-error-event" as defined
per the ietf-vrrp.yang model within [RFC8347]. Event records based per the ietf-vrrp YANG data model in [RFC8347]. Event records based
on this specification which are generated by the publisher might on this specification that are generated by the publisher might
appear as: appear as:
<notification xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0"> <notification xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0">
<eventTime>2018-09-14T08:22:33.44Z</eventTime> <eventTime>2018-09-14T08:22:33.44Z</eventTime>
<vrrp-protocol-error-event <vrrp-protocol-error-event
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-vrrp"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-vrrp">
<protocol-error-reason>checksum-error</protocol-error-reason> <protocol-error-reason>checksum-error</protocol-error-reason>
</vrrp-protocol-error-event> </vrrp-protocol-error-event>
</notification> </notification>
Figure 14: RFC 8347 (VRRP) - Example Notification Figure 14: Example VRRP Notification per RFC 8347
Suppose a subscriber wanted to establish a subscription which only Suppose that a subscriber wanted to establish a subscription that
passes instances of event records where there is a "checksum-error" only passes instances of event records where there is a
as part of a VRRP protocol event. Also assume the publisher places "checksum-error" as part of a Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol
such event records into the NETCONF stream. To get a continuous (VRRP) protocol event. Also, assume that the publisher places such
series of matching event records, the subscriber might request the event records into the NETCONF stream. To get a continuous series of
application of an XPath filter against the NETCONF stream. An matching event records, the subscriber might request the application
"establish-subscription" RPC to meet this objective might be: of an XPath filter against the NETCONF stream. An "establish-
subscription" RPC to meet this objective might be:
<rpc message-id="601" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> <rpc message-id="601" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<establish-subscription <establish-subscription
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications">
<stream>NETCONF</stream> <stream>NETCONF</stream>
<stream-xpath-filter xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-vrrp"> <stream-xpath-filter xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-vrrp">
/vrrp-protocol-error-event[ /vrrp-protocol-error-event[
vrrp:protocol-error-reason="vrrp:checksum-error"] vrrp:protocol-error-reason="vrrp:checksum-error"]
</stream-xpath-filter> </stream-xpath-filter>
</establish-subscription> </establish-subscription>
</rpc> </rpc>
Figure 15: Establishing a subscription error reason via XPath Figure 15: Establishing a Subscription Error Reason via XPath
For more examples of XPath filters, see [XPATH]. For more examples of XPath filters, see [XPATH].
Suppose the "establish-subscription" in Figure 15 was accepted. And Suppose that the "establish-subscription" in Figure 15 was accepted.
suppose later a subscriber decided they wanted to broaden this And suppose that a subscriber decided later on that they wanted to
subscription cover to all VRRP protocol events (i.e., not just those broaden this subscription to cover all VRRP protocol events (i.e.,
with a "checksum error"). The subscriber might attempt to modify the not just those with a "checksum-error"). The subscriber might
subscription in a way which replaces the XPath filter with a subtree attempt to modify the subscription in a way that replaces the XPath
filter which sends all VRRP protocol events to a subscriber. Such a filter with a subtree filter that sends all VRRP protocol events to a
"modify-subscription" RPC might look like: subscriber. Such a "modify-subscription" RPC might look like:
<rpc message-id="602" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0"> <rpc message-id="602" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
<modify-subscription <modify-subscription
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications"> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-subscribed-notifications">
<id>99</id> <id>99</id>
<stream-subtree-filter> <stream-subtree-filter>
<vrrp-protocol-error-event <vrrp-protocol-error-event
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-vrrp"/> xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-vrrp"/>
</stream-subtree-filter> </stream-subtree-filter>
</modify-subscription> </modify-subscription>
</rpc> </rpc>
Figure 16 Figure 16: Example "modify-subscription" RPC
For more examples of subtree filters, see [RFC6241], section 6.4.
Appendix B. Changes between revisions
(To be removed by RFC editor prior to publication)
B.1. v21 to v22
o Added "is".
B.2. v20 to v21
o Including Tom Petch's text to resolve the meaning of 'binding'.
o A few small wording tweaks.
B.3. v19 to v20
o Notes to RFC editor removed, consideration moved under Figure 10
in SN.
B.4. v17 to v19
o Per Benjamin Kaduk's discuss on SN, adjusted IPR to
pre5378Trust200902
B.5. v16 to v17
o During the SN YANG Doctor review, a suggestion was made to update
the error-tags to make the mechanism work with embedded NETCONF
and RESTCONF error reporting.
o Minor text tweaks from review.
B.6. v15 to v16
o During the shepherd review, two clarifications were requested
which do not impact the technical details of this document. These
clarifications were: (a) further describing that dynamic
subscriptions can have state change notifications, and (b) more
details about the recommended text refinement desired for RFC6241.
B.7. v14 to v15
o Per Kent's request, added name attribute to artwork. This would
be needed for an automated extraction.
B.8. v13 to v14
o Title change.
B.9. v11 to v13
o Subscription identifier renamed to id.
o Appendix A.4 for filter examples
o for v13, Tweak of example to /foo/bar
B.10. v10 to v11
o Configured removed.
B.11. v09 to v10
o Tweaks to examples and text.
o Downshifted state names.
o Removed address from examples.
B.12. v08 to v09
o Tweaks based on Kent's comments.
o Updated examples in Appendix A. And updates to some object names
based on changes in the subscribed-notifications draft.
o Added a YANG model for the NETCONF identity.
B.13. v07 to v08
o Tweaks and clarification on :interleave.
B.14. v06 to v07
o XML encoding and operational datastore mandatory.
o Error mechanisms and examples updated.
B.15. v05 to v06
o Moved examples to appendices
o All examples rewritten based on namespace learnings
o Normative text consolidated in front
o Removed all mention of JSON
o Call home process detailed
o Note: this is a major revision attempting to cover those comments
received from two week review.
B.16. v03 to v04
o Added additional detail to "configured subscriptions"
o Added interleave capability
o Adjusted terminology to that in draft-ietf-netconf-subscribed-
notifications
o Corrected namespaces in examples
B.17. v01 to v03
o Text simplifications throughout For more examples of subtree filters, see [RFC6241], Section 6.4.
o v02 had no meaningful changes
B.18. v00 to v01 Acknowledgments
o Added Call Home in solution for configured subscriptions. We wish to acknowledge the helpful contributions, comments, and
o Clarified support for multiple subscription on a single session. suggestions that were received from Andy Bierman, Yan Gang, Sharon
No need to support multiple create-subscription. Chisholm, Hector Trevino, Peipei Guo, Susan Hares, Tim Jenkins,
o Added mapping between terminology in yang-push and [RFC6241] (the Balazs Lengyel, Martin Bjorklund, Mahesh Jethanandani, Kent Watsen,
one followed in this document). Qin Wu, and Guangying Zheng.
o Editorial improvements.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Eric Voit Eric Voit
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Email: evoit@cisco.com Email: evoit@cisco.com
Alexander Clemm Alexander Clemm
Huawei Futurewei
Email: ludwig@clemm.org Email: ludwig@clemm.org
Alberto Gonzalez Prieto Alberto Gonzalez Prieto
Microsoft Microsoft
Email: alberto.gonzalez@microsoft.com Email: alberto.gonzalez@microsoft.com
Einar Nilsen-Nygaard Einar Nilsen-Nygaard
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
 End of changes. 96 change blocks. 
453 lines changed or deleted 309 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/