So, first you say that the group won't pursue any data modeling, and now you're worried that SOAP will force the creation of proprietary data models?
regards,
John
John Strassner
Chief Strategy Officer
Intelliden Corporation
90 South Cascade Avenue
Colorado Springs, CO 80903 USA
phone: +1.719.785.0648
FAX: +1.719.785.0644
email: john.strassner@intelliden.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Bierman [mailto:abierman@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 3:54 PM
To: Brendan Kelly
Cc: 'Allen, Keith'; 'xmlconf@ops.ietf.org'
Subject: RE: WSDL
At 03:42 PM 4/16/2003 -0600, Brendan Kelly wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andy Bierman [<mailto:abierman@cisco.com>mailto:abierman@cisco.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 3:30 PM
>> To: Allen, Keith
>> Cc: xmlconf@ops.ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: WSDL
>>
>> At 04:06 PM 4/16/2003 -0500, Allen, Keith wrote:
>>
>> >OK, I'll see the bet and raise the ante. Could you explain
>> >succinctly why
>> we need a new protocol at all? Why instead aren't we defining WSDL
>> messages for different functions, and then using SOAP bindings and UDDI to
>> solve the problem?
>> >
>> >regards,
>> >John
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Umm. Because that would be too easy?
>>
>> Since it is so easy, how about if you volunteer to create a WSDL
>> version of the XMLCONF protocol so we can compare the XML messages
>> that would be used with both approaches? Never mind the transport
>> issues for now.
>>
>> It seems to me there are different user communities for the
>> output of the netconf WG, which don't share the same goals.
>> One group wants to create lightweight mechanisms that can
>> be used to leverage existing CLI (training by operators,
>> code by vendors). Another group wants to leverage tools
>> which may already exist for application data exchange,
>> but are not particularly lightweight or aligned with
>> existing CLI implementations.
>>
>> Both are valid positions, and I am concerned that we will
>> not be able to produce a single solution that is completely
>> satisfactory to both camps.
>
>Why can't we have both? I would like to see this working group to
>focus on the application side (possible WSDL). Use the current draft
>from Rob Enns as the basis for the configuration definition of the
>WSDL. Let CLI be what it is.
This is too abstract for me. I need to see concrete proposals like the XMLCONF draft. What exactly do the protocol messages look like? What requirements does the protocol put on the data model? Will WSDL+SOAP force vendors to create proprietary data models in a certain way? It is an explicit goal of XMLCONF to avoid such constraints.
>Brendan
Andy
>>
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >I must say I asked my question in response to thinking about how we
>> >would
>> go about building applications that would use a NETCONF interface.
>> It
>> would be nice to have a WSDL description we could just feed into a web
>> services toolkit. WSDL is extensible, though, and should allow us to
>> write a BEEP binding (much like we would write a SOAP binding), and then
>> use UDDI. I just didn't want to be the first one to write a BEEP binding
>> for WSDL. I actually sent an e-mail to the chair of the BEEP WG to see if
>> anyone else has done this. Then all we would need is a web services
>> toolkit that supports BEEP. Keeping my fingers crossed...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Keith Allen
>> >
>> >SBC Technology Resources
>> >
>> >9505 Arboretum Blvd.
>> >
>> >Austin, TX 78759
>> >
>> >(512) 372-5741
>> >
>> ><<mailto:kallen@tri.sbc.com>mailto:kallen@tri.sbc.com>kallen@tri.sbc
>> >.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: John Strassner [<mailto:John.Strassner@intelliden.com>mailto:John.Strassner@intelliden.com]
>> >Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 3:54 PM
>> >To: 'Andy Bierman'; Allen, Keith
>> >Cc: xmlconf@ops.ietf.org
>> >Subject: RE: charter proposal - rev C
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >OK, I'll see the bet and raise the ante. Could you explain
>> >succinctly why
>> we need a new protocol at all? Why instead aren't we defining WSDL
>> messages for different functions, and then using SOAP bindings and UDDI to
>> solve the problem?
>> >
>> >regards,
>> >John
>> >
>> >John Strassner
>> >Chief Strategy Officer
>> >Intelliden Corporation
>> >90 South Cascade Avenue
>> >Colorado Springs, CO 80903 USA
>> >phone: +1.719.785.0648
>> > FAX: +1.719.785.0644
>> >email: john.strassner@intelliden.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Andy Bierman [<<mailto:abierman@cisco.com>mailto:abierman@cisco.com>mailto:abierman@cisco.com]
>> >Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 2:46 PM
>> >To: Allen, Keith
>> >Cc: xmlconf@ops.ietf.org
>> >Subject: RE: charter proposal - rev C
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >At 03:09 PM 4/16/2003 -0500, Allen, Keith wrote:
>> >>All,
>> >>
>> >>It seems to me, based on my admittedly limited knowledge in the
>> >>area,
>> >>that a main output of the working group should be a WSDL description of
>> >>the network configuration service. Is this something that needs to be
>> >>part of the charter or is this something the WG would decide once it is
>> >>underway?
>> >
>> >This could be discussed by the WG. So far, I have only heard
>> >interest in
>> WSDL from one person. If there is enough WG interest in this extra
>> deliverable, then it could be done by the WG at some point. It could also
>> be done separately, outside the WG, as an Informational RFC.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>Keith Allen
>> >>SBC Technology Resources
>> >>9505 Arboretum Blvd.
>> >>Austin, TX 78759
>> >>(512) 372-5741
>> >>kallen@tri.sbc.com
>> >>
>> >
>> >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/>http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlco
>> nf/>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/>http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlco
>> nf/>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/>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/>