Failure to negotiate netconf hello with Cisco CSR1000V - missing xml version about jnc HOT 9 CLOSED

With this patch:

diff --git a/jnc/src/com/tailf/jnc/NetconfSession.java b/jnc/src/com/tailf/jnc/NetconfSession.java
index 0d25abe..60a4124 100644
--- a/jnc/src/com/tailf/jnc/NetconfSession.java
+++ b/jnc/src/com/tailf/jnc/NetconfSession.java
@@ -1559,6 +1559,7 @@ public class NetconfSession {
      * side are the base NETCONF capability.
      */
     void encode_hello(Transport out) {
+       out.print("<?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"UTF-8\"?>");
         out.print("<hello xmlns=\"" + Capabilities.NS_NETCONF + "\">");
         out.print("<capabilities>");
         out.println("<capability>" + Capabilities.NETCONF_BASE_CAPABILITY

It will negotiate a hello.

However, it then dies as follows:

*NetconfSession: reply= 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rpc-reply xmlns="urn:ietf:params:netconf:base:1.0"><rpc-error><error-type>rpc</error-type><error-tag>missing-element</error-tag><error-severity>error</error-severity><error-info><bad-element>xml</bad-element></error-info></rpc-error></rpc-reply>
[Fatal Error] :2:6: The processing instruction target matching "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed.
Exception in thread "main" Parse error: parse error: org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: The processing instruction target matching "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed.
    at com.tailf.jnc.XMLParser.parse(XMLParser.java:139)
    at com.tailf.jnc.XMLParser.parse(XMLParser.java:154)
    at com.tailf.jnc.NetconfSession.recv_rpc_reply(NetconfSession.java:1483)
    at com.tailf.jnc.NetconfSession.recv_rpc_reply_data(NetconfSession.java:1460)
    at com.tailf.jnc.NetconfSession.getConfig(NetconfSession.java:443)
    at com.tailf.jnc.NetconfSession.getConfig(NetconfSession.java:433)
    at testnetconf.TestNetconf.main(TestNetconf.java:46)

It looks like JNC really neither wants to send or receive <?xml ... ?> but the Cisco insists on it. Who is right here?

from jnc.

Apparently both JNC and the Cisco are broken.

From RFC 6241 section 3:

A NETCONF message MAY begin with an XML declaration (see Section 2.8 of [W3C.REC-xml-20001006]).

MAY in RFC terms means this is optional. The Cisco is therefore at fault for requiring it on Netconf commands received. JNC is also at fault in refusing to accept responses containing it.

from jnc.

The Cisco CSR1000v doesn't have a working netconf impl.
that can be used. No need to pursue that ...

/klacke

On 16/11/14 23:00, Alex Bligh wrote:

Apparently both JNC and the Cisco are broken.

From RFC 6241 section 3:

A NETCONF message MAY begin with an XML declaration (see Section 2.8
of [W3C.REC-xml-20001006]).

|MAY| in RFC terms means this is optional. The Cisco is therefore at
fault for requiring it on Netconf commands received. JNC is also at
fault in refusing to accept responses containing it.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#38 (comment).

from jnc.

Dear @klacke
can you give me the document which describe "The Cisco CSR1000v doesn't have a working netconf impl." Thanks

from jnc.

Don't have such a doc, I just know this. XR has working
netconf by now, not IOS.

They have something, but it's not NETCONF, just NETCONFish.

/klacke

On 03/12/14 01:09, t-anh wrote:

Dear @klacke https://github.com/klacke

can you give me the document which describe "The Cisco CSR1000v doesn't
have a working netconf impl." Thanks

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#38 (comment).

from jnc.

Now I'm using Cisco CSR 1000v 3.11s, and it support NETCONF.

from jnc.

Hello ,

Can i have the whole list on devices that support NETCONF ?

thank you

2014-12-04 11:10 GMT+01:00 t-anh [email protected]:

Now I'm using Cisco CSR 1000v 3.11s, and it support NETCONF.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#38 (comment).

[image: UBIqube Solutions] http://www.ubiqube.com

Said MALAH / R&D Apprentice Enginner
+33 (0)7 53 65 01 75/ [email protected]

UBIqube Solutions Office: +33 438 498 364 / Fax: +33 438 498 361
Parc Sud Galaxie 5, rue des Tropiques 38130 Échirolles France
www.ubiqube.com

[image: Facebook] http://www.facebook.com/saiid.junior [image:
Twitter] http://www.twitter.com/Saiid.juni0r [image: Instagram]
http://instagram.com/Said_Malah [image: Skype]
http://skype.com/SAID+MALAH

from jnc.

t-anh: I opened this issue precisely because neither Cisco CSR 1000v (3.12) nor JNC appear to follow the Netconf standard:

Apparently both JNC and the Cisco are broken.

From RFC 6241 section 3:

A NETCONF message MAY begin with an XML declaration (see Section 2.8 of [W3C.REC-xml-20001006]).

MAY in RFC terms means this is optional. The Cisco is therefore at fault for requiring it on Netconf commands received. JNC is also at fault in refusing to accept responses containing it.

from jnc.

I agree that the <?xml header should be both sent and received by JNC. Needs to be fixed.

As for the NETCONF impl on CSR 1000v , maybe you know more than me here, but
last time I looked it was completely worthless. You're stumbling on the <?xml header, if
you were to get pass that, the list of anomalies continues forever. Furthermore, the payload
was just CLI commands wrapped in garbled XML.
The CSR 1000v NETCONF is probably just there to fill a tickmark in some RFQ.

from jnc.