Re: Is beep really what operators would want?

[Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>]

>>>>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 03:16:16 -0400, Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net> said:

Phil,

Fantastic summary.  Thanks!

Phil> So how does this fit into the netconf/BEEP world? I imagine a simple
Phil> front-end perl script that will do the BEEP/SASL connection startup
Phil> and begin accepting input when the management channel is opened.
Phil> Or (optionally) open the operations channel and start accepting
Phil> input for this channel. I then cut-n-paste my XML snippet, hit ^D
Phil> (or something), and the script takes my input, calculates the header,
Phil> logs the full RPC, sends the data to the server, and displays (and
Phil> logs) the response.

That was exactly what I was trying to get at, but stated much more
clearly and with better examples.  My real question was: are all the
operators happy with the above notion of connecting to a device (IE,
you must have a front end connection program which is *not* telnet or
ssh) in order to do your minimal cut-n-paste type examples.  I'd argue
for "yes" its sufficient but I wasn't sure everyone else agreed with
myself or the protocol designers and was looking for other opinions.

-- 
"In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap,
 and much more difficult to find."  -- Terry Pratchett

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>