James Cumming \(Nokia\) <[email protected]> wrote: > Has anyone encountered the situation where the server believes it can > fulfil the action and starts doing so (perhaps a long running output or > an output that returns in chunks) and subsequently encounters an error. > In this situation the rpc-reply would have started and so an rpc-error > wouldn’t be returned.
The answer in HTTP was that one returned a 201 result with a Location Header
with a reference to an activity that can be polled to determine status.
That's what I'd want to do in NETCONF, but obviously that creates a different
data model. I am do not have sufficient YANG/rpc-fu to know how common the
above pattern is, or whether it can be retrofitted.
> If this is indeed a gap in the specification, should we look to close
> it in NETCONF 2.0? This is currently sitting in the YANG 1.1 spec
> [hence the NETCONF/NETMOD cross-post] (including the NETCONF/XML part
> of it but I believe this is on Kent’s list to strip out).
I'd want it to be a standard pattern that can be applied to any RPC.
But, it's not my thing.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
