[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: netconf WG charter proposal
At 10:31 AM 4/7/2003 -0400, Bryan Strickland wrote:
>From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [<mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>mailto:email@example.com]
>Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 9:53 AM
>Subject: Re: netconf WG charter proposal
>I agree with Juergen. The proposed request/response method is not
>like RPC mechanisms I have seen/used in the past. It is more like a
>remote CLI, or programmatic CLI than it is an RPC mechanism. There
>is no provision for method signatures, no data types (other than String)
>and there is no notion of the remote service or object that the RPC
>is being called on. Personally, I think that a standard, existing
>RPC mechanism (XML/RPC, SOAP) would likely be beneficial.
please look at rev B of the charter proposal. The term RPC
has been removed completely.
>>>>>> Andy Bierman writes:
>>> Furthermore, I do not understand why the charter requires RPCs. And
>>> in fact, JunoScript and xmlconf both seem to be just request/response
>>> protocols very similar to SNMP by the way. I fail to see real support
>>> for RPC abstractions in the classic sense. I suggest just to drop the
>>> text about RPCs - I do not find it convincing or helpful.
>Andy> What is the difference between an RPC and a request that carries
>Andy> zero or more input parameters, followed by a response with zero or
>Andy> more output parameters? It is understood that some work may be
>Andy> done on the device to produce the response, and that the response
>Andy> may be delayed (hence the rpc-progress reports). This looks to me
>Andy> like an RPC model, not a generic request/response model.
>>> Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
>>>In my world model, request-response protocols are a mechanism which you can use to build RPC protocols. But there >>are request-response protocols that are not RPC protocols. In fact, I believe that RPCs in general were invented >>with the notion of procedure or function calls where one can call a remote function/procedure almost like a local >>function/procedure call. This basically means that RPCs have a signature which defines the input and output
>>>parameters. Your RPCs just send XML blobs or even non-XML blobs around, which does not really match my
>>>understanding of RPCs.
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.