hi
I have a clarifying question:
The last paragraph of section 2.4 reads
"It is also possible to respond to the concern on the re-use of port
80. A NETCONF SOAP service can be offered on any desired port, and
it is recommended that a new standard port for SOAP over HTTP, or a
new standard port for NETCONF over SOAP (over HTTP) be defined, as
requested in the IANA considerations of this document."
Which considering the IANA considerations section says the following
"The IANA will assign TCP ports for NETCONF for SOAP over HTTP and
SOAP over BEEP."
seems too weak. Is the section in 2.4 left over from before it was
decided we liked specific ports, or did we intend to leave port use as
an exercise to the reader?
Sharon
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-
netconf@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Andy Bierman
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 10:22 PM
To: Bert Wijnen
Cc: Simon Leinen; David Kessens; netconf; iesg-secretary@ietf.org
Subject: I-D Publication Request: draft-ietf-netconf-soap-05.txt
[Area] OPS-NM
[WG] NETCONF
[I-D] draft-ietf-netconf-soap-05.txt
[Qver] draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding-05.txt
[Shep] Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>
1.a) Yes, the WG Chairs have reviewed this version of the
document, and believe it is ready for publication.
1.b) Yes the document has had adequate review. Several
WG members have reviewed this document.
1.c) There are no open issues, and no further review is
required, for this document.
1.d) There are no concerns with this document at this time.
It is possible that clarifications will be identified
as implementation and interoperability experience is
reported to the WG.
1.e) There is strong WG consensus for this document.
It is expected that more complex network applications
(e.g., 1st or 3rd party commercial applications) will
use this application mapping for NETCONF.
1.f) No appeals have been threatened against this document.
1.g) There are some minor ID-nits that will be fixed
before RFC publication. (See ID-nit log below).
1.h) Yes, references are split.
Yes, there is a reference to an unpublished document,
namely the NETCONF Configuration Protocol document
(draft-ietf-netconf-prot-07.txt), but this is also ready
for publication.
1.j) I-D Submission Summary
Technical Summary
The Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) is applicable to a
wide
range of devices in a variety of environments. The emergence of
Web
Services gives one such environment, and is presently characterized
by the use of the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP). NETCONF
finds many benefits in this environment: from the re-use of
existing
standards, to ease of software development, to integration with
deployed systems. Herein, we describe SOAP over HTTP and SOAP over
BEEP bindings for NETCONF.
Working Group Summary
The NETCONF Working Group has consensus to publish this document
as a Proposed Standard.
Protocol Quality
It is likely that there are several implementations of this
document in various stages of completion at this time.
Several major equipment vendors have indicated interest in
supporting this document, and some non-commercial
implementations are also expected.
----------------
[ID-nit log]
idnits 1.74
tmp/draft-ietf-netconf-soap-05.txt:
tmp/draft-ietf-netconf-soap-05.txt(452):
Line is too long: the offending characters are 'elope"'
tmp/draft-ietf-netconf-soap-05.txt(464):
Line is too long: the offending characters are 's:netconf:base:
1.0">'
Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html:
Checking conformance with RFC 3978/3979 boilerplate...
* The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.1 IPR Disclosure
Acknowledgement.
(Expected a match on the following text:
"By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that
any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.")
(The document uses RFC 3667 boilerplate or RFC 3978-like
boilerplate instead of verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate. After 6 May
2005,
submission of drafts without verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate is not
accepted.)
Checking nits according to
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt:
Nothing found here (but these checks do not cover all of
1id-guidelines.txt yet).
Miscellaneous warnings:
None.
--
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/>