RE: netconf WG charter proposal

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>]

> 
> </ad-hat>
> 
> > If I understand well what you are saying, separation between the
> > configuration and non-configuration data is something that needs
> > to be realized both at the level of the retrieval mechanisms in
> > the protocol, as well as in the data model. I suggest that the
> > later be specifically added to the 'requirements for standard
> > data models in order to fully support the Netconf protocol' in
> > the netconf charter proposal.
> 
> something keeps bothering me here.  i am not sure i can fully put
> my finger on it.  but it's something like worrying that we are
> trying to overly describe what we *don't* do.  can we just talk
> about configuration, and not get into characterizing what other
> types of data there might be?
> 
> or are we seriously considering that the wg should also cover
> setting and retrieval of other data, e.g., state data such as
> interface counters etc.?
> 
> or maybe my discomfort is due to lack of clue.

draft-enns.. defines 'configuration information' and 'state information'. It also specifies separate mechanisms to transport data belonging to each one of the two categories. Can we really avoid discussing what each one would contain? 

Dan

--
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/>