[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: notification charter proposal
- To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
- Subject: Re: notification charter proposal
- From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:25:06 +0100
- Cc: Glenn Waters <gww@nortel.com>, "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net>, Sharon Chisholm <schishol@nortel.com>, netconf@ops.ietf.org
- In-reply-to: <4384BF51.6020205@cisco.com>
- Mail-followup-to: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Glenn Waters <gww@nortel.com>, "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net>, Sharon Chisholm <schishol@nortel.com>, netconf@ops.ietf.org
- References: <085091CB2CA14E4B8B163FFC37C84E9D073ED776@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com> <4384BF51.6020205@cisco.com>
- Reply-to: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.10i
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 08:13:21PM +0100, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Glenn,
>
> What I'm saying is that while it is true that SSH is the "mandatory to
> implement", you only need to have application-level ACKs in the
> notification component if THEY are mandatory to implement. Otherwise
> you can leave it to the BEEP mapping and be done with it.
Again,
lets first decide which semantics we need and then talk about the
implementation. I personally have bad feelings if sematics associated
with a netconf protocol operation are determined by the underlying
transport.
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany
--
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/>