RE: Notification architecture

["Sharon Chisholm" <schishol@nortel.com>]

hi

<Andy>
I have found that there is no better way to improve a design than by
implementing it.  I believe both co-Chairs of this WG would rather start
(any charter item) with a deployed working solution than with an
untested proposal. 
</Andy>

So, you'll be pleased to learn that an earlier version of this is
being/has been implemented. Any feedback we get from implementers or
users we will be sure to feedback into the working group. I've already
made some adjustments based on this sort of feedback.

<Andy>
I don't think we should have a complicated architecture
unless we FULLY UNDERSTAND WHY.
I am never swayed by arguments like "we might
want to do some unknown thing the future".
If the WG agrees on specific future extensions, that's something else.
All engineering tradeoffs need to be cost-justified.
</Andy>

The problem is that we are both arguing that we are proposing the
simpler architecture. That isn't helpful.

Sharon

--
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/>