Re: Goals for netconf - moving towards the charter description

[Subhendu Ghosh <sghosh@sghosh.org>]

On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, RJ Atkinson wrote:

> 
> On Sunday, Mar 23, 2003, at 21:50 America/Montreal, Andy Bierman wrote:
> > Why do you think the NETCONF WG should be concerned with the
> > configuration data for specific technologies?  Why would the
> > protocol need to be different to manipulate fault configuration
> > data vs. port configuration data, or any other kind of
> > configuration data for that matter?  From the protocol POV,
> > configuration data is just text payload.
> 
> IMHO, the key thing is that the proposal(s) here are for moving
> XML-based device configuration data over an IP network, not
> directly moving that data over ATM or ISDN or FDDI.
> 
> So the target scope is necessarily limited to IP-centric devices,
> rather than all conceivable telecommunications equipment.
> 
> This is slightly different scope than SNMP, which can
> either run over IP or run over different non-IP technologies.
> 

Configuration data is just text payload. I think the focus should be on 
IP-centric transport (not devices).  Future work could map to different 
transports just like for SNMP (as the op community sees the need).

On Faye's comment about - Inventory Configuration management - 
Runnign an inventory of the configuration of all devices on the net should 
be a side affect of ability to retrieve configurations.  The actual 
inventory mgmt should be up to the application designers not the protocol.

Of course we have already implied/explicitly stated the need transactions 
in the applications to support "write" part of the protocl.


-- 
-Subhendu Ghosh



--
to unsubscribe send a message to xmlconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlconf/>