RE: netconf WG charter proposal

[Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>]

At 09:55 AM 4/6/2003 -0400, Randy Bush wrote:
></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.

The XMLCONF draft does contain separate <get-config> 
and <get-state> protocol operations.  This was done
to satisfy an operator requirement (identified at the
NM Workshop) that it should be easy to retrieve 
config data in a format that can then be directly fed
back to the device in a 'set config' operation.

IMO we need the <get-state> operation to retrieve non-config
data, such as interface counters, the device uptime,
the list of users currently logged in, etc.


>randy

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/>