Subject: Re: [netconf] SN and indirection

From: Mahesh Jethanandani <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 18:35:04 -0700

[Trimming down the thread to one issue]

Hi Martin,

> On Aug 30, 2019, at 8:03 AM, Martin Bjorklund <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
>> My personal opinion is that the indirection introduced in https-notif
>> is likely to be desired by all notif transports for configured
>> subscriptions
> 
> I agree.
> 
>> but it's unclear to me if the leverage to be had by
>> consolidating the pattern into SN is significantly better than the
>> copy/pasting the pattern into each notif draft, especially when
>> considering that we're not likely to ever have more than a few such
>> notif drafts.
> 
> If we don't have a generic indirection, I would like the current
> https-notif solution better if it didn't put 'receivers' at the
> top-level, but instead augmented it into '/sn:subscribers', and
> renamed it to 'https-receivers'.  Further, the 'receiver-ref' should
> probably be called 'https-receiver-ref' or something.

What would be the motivation to rename the receiver-ref to be https-receiver-ref? The receiver-ref is being declared in the 'ietf-https-notif’ namespace, which indicates the type of receiver it is, and prevents any name conflict with other receivers being declared in other namespaces. 

Thanks.

Mahesh Jethanandani
[email-masked]