RE: netconf WG charter proposal

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

SG,

Sorry but I don't get your comments?  I am not talking about any data
model here but rather asking for clarification on the terminology 'state
info'.

-faye

-----Original Message-----
From: Subhendu Ghosh [mailto:sghosh@sghosh.org] 
Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2003 7:56 PM
To: Faye Ly
Cc: xmlconf@ops.ietf.org
Subject: RE: netconf WG charter proposal

Faye

I think you are trying to shut the barn door before the horse gets in.

The data model is not in the immediate scope.  All the proposed charter 
states is that the protocal provide mecahnisms that can differentiate.

There will always be standard data models and propritary data models.
The 
protocol needs to be able to suuport both.

-sg

On Sun, 13 Apr 2003, Faye Ly wrote:

> Andy,
> 
> The statistics information is frequently configured to be sent to the
> NMS at intervals from the network device.  Why do you need to
> <get-state> on counters to verify configuration, by the way?  
> 
> -faye  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Bierman [mailto:abierman@cisco.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2003 3:20 PM
> To: Faye Ly
> Cc: Harrington, David; xmlconf@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: netconf WG charter proposal
> 
> At 02:49 PM 4/13/2003 -0700, Faye Ly wrote:
> >Andy,
> >
> >Can you please clarify the state information?  Is this the status
(such
> >as ifOperStatus) or statistics (such as ifIn unicast packets)?  I
think
> >the netconf protocol should cover the former but not the later.  
> 
> I think both represent state information.  Both are just more
> XML payload from the protocol POV.  Why do you think we should
> outlaw certain data model payloads in the <get-state> operation?
> Please provide some technical rationale for your opinion.
> 
> 
> >-faye
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Andy Bierman [mailto:abierman@cisco.com] 
> >Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 9:15 AM
> >To: Harrington, David
> >Cc: xmlconf@ops.ietf.org
> >Subject: RE: netconf WG charter proposal
> >
> >At 11:09 AM 4/12/2003 -0400, Harrington, David wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >> 
> >>I suggest that netconf should not address these additional usages,
but
> >should consider them in its design so as to not preclude addressing
> them
> >later by reusing the netconf protocol solution.
> >
> >There have been several people (at the BOF and in email)
> >that have stated that it is very important to retrieve
> >some state data with the same protocol as they use send
> >and receive configuration data.  
> >
> >The people against this capability cannot explain (even a little)
> >why retrieving ifOperStatus is somehow different than retrieving
> >ifAdminStatus.  The evidence I have seen so far (i.e., proprietary
> >XML solutions such as JunoScript) suggest that no special mechanisms
> >are needed to retrieve state data vs. retrieve config data. What
> >evidence do you have to suggest otherwise?
> >
> >> 
> >>my $.02
> >>dbh
> >
> >Andy
> >
> >>-----Original Message----- 
> >>From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com] 
> >>Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 3:45 PM 
> >>To: mrm 
> >>Cc: Allen, Keith; xmlconf@ops.ietf.org 
> >>Subject: RE: netconf WG charter proposal
> >>
> >>>> We would prefer to use one protocol for both configuration and
> >monitoring 
> >>>> both to limit the number of interfaces we have to support and to
> >eliminate 
> >>>> the problems that crop up with trying to use multiple protocols
to
> >manage 
> >>>> one box. 
> >>> I would suggest debug in addition to config and monitoring 
> >>> be a first class consideration.
> >>
> >>andy, if we are going to cater to such mission creep, it's probably 
> >>appropriate move the millstones one or two years later in the
charter.
> 
> >>or maybe separate xmlconf and xml-b-arc into two separate efforts?
> >>
> >>randy
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>-- 
> >>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/>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/> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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/>