RE: Goals for netconf - moving towards the charter description

["Faye Ly" <faye@pedestalnetworks.com>]

Ran,

You meant IP stack for user data not for management data, right?  Most
of the ATM and FDDI (and so on) have IP stack on their mgmt channel.  Is
this really what the operator want?  Because when I read the operator's
requirement, it is not clear that they only need to have a protocol that
configures IP user data and nothing else.  

It sounds like they are asking for a configuration protocol that replace
the existing scripting/config file capability more than anything else.

Best,

-faye

-----Original Message-----
From: RJ Atkinson [mailto:rja@extremenetworks.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 7:25 AM
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Cc: xmlconf@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Goals for netconf - moving towards the charter description


On Monday, Mar 24, 2003, at 09:53 America/Montreal, Romascanu, Dan 
(Dan) wrote:
> I am confused about the distinction that you are making between 
> 'IP-centric' devices and the rest.

It is pretty simple:

	"Has an IP stack" == IP-centric
	"Does not have an IP stack" == not IP-centric

Ran


--
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/>

--
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/>