[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Balazs Lengyel wrote:
> I'm not prepared to be the first lamb on that altar. ;^)
Someone has to be :-) otherwise NETCONF is dead already.
What is especially depressing:
1) Notification filtering and delivery is a well understood problem,
traditionally handled with NV-stored configuration on the
2) This is a relatively simple configurable feature on a
complex networking device such as a router.
3) If the NETCONF WG cannot (or does not) use the
NETCONF protocol to configure the NETCONF protocol,
then nobody else will use it either.
4) If something as basic as a filtering table and notification
generation parameters are not appropriate for implementation as a
standard data model (accessed with <edit-config> and <get-config>),
then what is an appropriate use of the NETCONF protocol
standard operations and standard data models?
5) If you can define a representation of a 'feature' in a data model
for monitoring, then you've already done most of the work for
configuration. Read-only vs. read-write is an artificial
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.