RE: Agenda for NETCONF WG session at IETF #71

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David B Harrington [mailto:dbharrington@comcast.net] 
> Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2008 7:47 PM
> To: 'Andy Bierman'; 'Phil Shafer'
> Cc: 'Mehmet Ersue'; netconf@ops.ietf.org; 'Bert Wijnen'; 
> Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Subject: RE: Agenda for NETCONF WG session at IETF #71
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> > My top 3 issues (also nowhere on the radar):
> > 
> >   1) A NETCONF DML for non-modeling-experts, so operators,
> engineers,
> >      and IETFers can use NETCONF with ease
> >   2) An access control model
> >   3) A robust, extensible, multi-protocol NM architecture, that
> pulls
> >      together NETCONF, CLI, SNMP, SYSLOG, existing MIBs, 
> new next-gen 
> > MIBs,
> >      into a secure and standard API framework.
> > 
> 
> +1
> 
> Instead of the train, I'd be really happy if 1 and 2 were 
> compatible with 3. ;-)
> 
> David Harrington
> dbharrington@comcast.net
> ietfdbh@comcast.net
> dharrington@huawei.com
> 

Speaking as a contributor: 

+1

Speaking as an AD: 

1) we are working on it, and if we can reach consensus in Philadelphia
we should have it chartered sometimes soon

2) It looks to me that the community did not reach consensus that this
is an urgent item when the discussions for NETCONF rechartering happened

3) It was one of my big items when I became an AD two years ago. It
still is now. The scope is beyond NETCONF, so this should be discussed
in the OPS Area. 

Dan

--
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/>