RE: [Fwd: NETCONF checkpoint]

[<Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com>]

Hi Eliot,

>The working group is attempting to determine whether notifications 
>should remain as part of the base specification.  Here are the choices 
>facing the group:
>
>Option A.  Leave them in as currently specified, and require all 
>protocol mappings to support them.
>Option B.  Allow them to be asynchronous, but don't use RFC 3195, and 
>require all mappings to support them.
>Option C.  Remove them entirely from the specification and let vendors 
>implement RFC 3195 or other notification mechanisms as they see fit (for 
>instance, existing syslog).

Is there some reason why we only have these three choices?

What about making them an optional capability, and not requiring all
protocol mappings to support them?  

Margaret


--
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/>