[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: NetConf over SOAP normative reference issue
Hi,
Andy - thanks for that direct link to the SOAP/1.1 and
SOAP/1.2 differences list in the SOAP/1.2 Primer.
WG - please note that the bottom line is that a SOAP/1.1
receiver will NOT interoperate with a SOAP/1.2 sender
(the serializations are different, key attributes are
renamed, etc.).
There may be an update planned for RFC 3288, but no I-D
has been posted, so it won't be timely for NetConf.
New dumb questions Does NetConf even need BEEP?
Why not use a WebDAV-like binding over HTTP/1.1?
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Bierman [mailto:ietf@andybierman.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 1:56 PM
To: Ted Goddard
Cc: McDonald, Ira; 'Randy Presuhn'; netconf@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: NetConf over SOAP normative reference issue
Ted Goddard wrote:
>
> One of the original concerns about SOAP 1.2 was the lack of
> available implementations and the lack of compliance exhibited
> by SOAP 1.2 implementations.
I don't remember this being discussed by the WG
>
> It seems that SOAP 1.2 is now implemented widely enough to insist
> on it. Are there any comments on the current implementation status
> of SOAP 1.2 vs SOAP 1.1? (Is this even open to discussion, given
> the standards status of SOAP 1.2 vs SOAP 1.1?)
It's an issue that needs to be addressed.
Here are the differences between SOAP 1.1 and 1.2:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part0-20030624/#L4697
Are there any differences that impact NETCONF?
It doesn't seem like we can remove reference [16] (RFC 3288)
without removing all of section 2.6. Is there an update
planned for SOAP over BEEP?
>
> Thanks,
> Ted.
Andy
>
> On 16-Mar-05, at 9:42 AM, McDonald, Ira wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm agnostic about the use or non-use of BEEP in NetConf.
>>
>> But, yes I am urging you to change to SOAP/1.2 and NOT use
>> the SOAP/1.1 mapping over BEEP defined in RFC 3288.
>>
>> RFC 3288 slipped through the side door somehow and got published
>> without the IESG objecting to the RFC 3288 normative dependency
>> on the non-standards-track SOAP/1.1 W3C Note.
>>
>> The IESG (or at least Bert Wijnen) is now aware of this same
>> normative dependency (SOAP/1.1) in the NetConf over SOAP I-D.
>>
>> I submit this issue as a last call comment.
>>
>> Could someone please update the "Goals and Milestones" on the
>> IETF main page for NetConf WG, so that outsiders could tell
>> what's going on?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - Ira
>>
>>
>> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
>> Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
>> PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
>> phone: +1-906-494-2434
>> email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org]On
>> Behalf Of Randy Presuhn
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 7:26 PM
>> To: netconf@ops.ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: NetConf over SOAP normative reference issue
>>
>>
>> Hi -
>>
>>> From: "Andy Bierman" <ietf@andybierman.com>
>>> To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
>>> Cc: <netconf@psg.com>; <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 12:24 PM
>>> Subject: Re: NetConf over SOAP normative reference issue
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> Are you suggesting we re-cast the document in terms of SOAP 1.2,
>>>> and drop the BEEP dependency?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> what do you mean "drop the BEEP dependency"?
>>
>>
>> Ira's note said there was a normative reference to RFC 3288.
>>
>> Randy
>>
>>>>> From: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
>>>>> To: <netconf@psg.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 9:53 AM
>>>>> Subject: NetConf over SOAP normative reference issue
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> [Bert Wijnen asked me to pass on this comment.]
>>>>>
>>>>> The latest NetConf over SOAP <draft-ietf-netconf-soap-04.txt>
>>>>> has a serious problem for advancement on the IETF "standards
>>>>> track", to whit, these two normative references:
>>>>>
>>>>> [3] Box, D., Ehnebuske, D., Kakivaya, G., Layman, A., Mendelsohn,
>>>>> N., Nielsen, H., Thatte, S. and D. Winer, "Simple Object
>>>>> Access
>>>>> Protocol (SOAP) 1.1", W3C Note NOTE-SOAP-20000508, May 2000,
>>>>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508>.
>>>>>
>>>>> [16] O'Tuathail, E. and M. Rose, "Using the Simple Object Access
>>>>> Protocol (SOAP) in Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol
>>>>> (BEEP)",
>>>>> RFC 3288, June 2002, <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3288.txt>.
>>>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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/>
>>
>> --
>> 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/>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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/>
>
>
--
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/>