Re: minutes for NETCONF WG interim meeting (09/03)

[Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net>]

Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
>If URIs do not work for identifying protocol capabilities, then I am
>asking why URIs work for identifying schemas and schema versions.

Completely agree. In most cases, neither the client nor server will
care about the version component of the URI and will generally treat
the URI as an opaque string. In the rare case where the version
matters, you can guarantee that the software knows about the
capability and it's URI format, since if it did not, then it would
not need to inquire about the version at all.

In addition, version numbering schemes will vary by authoritative
organization, ranging from time-based schemes (year, year-month)
to simple major.miner numbering schemes. In some cases the version
numbering will be outside the control of the netconf implementor.
For example, I might use JUNOS version numbers for proprietary
namespaces, like 6.2R1.  So the version component can be parsed
just because it's presented in a distinct xml element.

Thanks,
 Phil

--
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/>