Re: how bad is soap?

[Frank Strauss <strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>]

Hi!

Andy> I think the cost/benefit ratio depends mostly on the tool
Andy> environment of the user.  I don't want to be the one to
Andy> tell operators they are using the wrong tools and need
Andy> to abandon their scripting environment and use something
Andy> else instead -- such as a WSDL compiler.  

I agree. Operators should be able to continue using their favorite
environment (OS, shell, scripting language, programming language,
database, etc.). And that is why I think SOAP/WSDL has a good chance,
because there are so many different implementations. In case of a
netconf architecture like in the current I-D, operators would either
(a) have to wait for a netconf implementation that fits in their
environment, or (b) they have to fiddle with all the stuff between XML
(e.g. DOM) and their management application logic on their own (all
the RPC stuff) with the drawbacks I mentioned in my previous message.

Andy> I don't know the size of the different netconf camps, but
Andy> I am very concerned about network operators who currently
Andy> rely on the CLI as a programmatic interface for configuration.
Andy> Based on all the data the OPS-NM Roadshow has collected over
Andy> the last 2+ years, this is a large group.

Ack.

 -frank

--
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/>