Re: netconf WG charter proposal

[Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>]

At 11:41 PM 4/3/2003 -0800, Randy Presuhn wrote:
>Hi -
>
>> From: "Andy Bierman" <abierman@cisco.com>
>> To: "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com>
>> Cc: <xmlconf@ops.ietf.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 11:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: netconf WG charter proposal
>...
>> >> The Netconf Working Group is chartered to produce a protocol
>> >> suitable for network configuration, with the following
>> >> characteristics:
>> >>
>> >>    - Provides a clear separation of configuration data
>> >>      from non-configuration data
>> >
>> >is this necessary to the task?  clearly universally achievable?
>>
>> It was listed as an operator requirement at the NM workshop.
>> It could be easy to achieve. It was never realized with SNMP.
>...
>
>As a property of the protocol per se?  It might be better to consider
>it a property of the information model that should be represented
>in the data model so that configuration management applications
>can focus on the right bits.

Actually, I think this is cleaner as a protocol feature
than an artifact of the data organization.  We never had
much luck writing MIBs that kept all state info in a separate
sub-tree from config info.  And what about objects that
are used for both (e.g. the ipRoutingTable uses the
same objects for static and learned routes)?  It's better
to tag the data with meta-attributes, and have the device
return config or state data, depending on the protocol
operation.


>Randy (the other one)

Andy




>--
>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/>