Re: Why are we doing netconf?

[Shane Kerr <Shane_Kerr@isc.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David Harrington wrote:
> I would like a better understasnding of why we are doing
> notifications. I am struck by what appears to me to be two very
> different drivers for netconf, and the "why are we doing
> notifications?" question relates to these different motivations.
<snip/>
> I am bothered by the fact that netconf, a configuration protocol, is
> being redesigned in the current proposal to carry syslog messages that
> may have nothing to do with configuration, and it is expected that
> even more stuff, also possibly not related to configuration, will be
> carried in a new event message format. Operators at the IAB Network
> Management Workshop apparently did not find syslog sufficiently broken
> to request that a new event messaging capability be designed, so I
> have concerns that the current proposal includes a brand-new
> notification solution.

It sounds like at least one person working on syslog thinks there is
value in a brand-new notification solution, and I believe him. :)

For me the first question is whether this should be done in NETCONF or
perhaps in a new working group. I don't know too much about it, but
since the scope seems very broad, I think maybe a new working group
makes sense, and NETCONF can declare victory.

- --
Shane
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEKlzVMsfZxBO4kbQRAoXnAKCq+uCpON+26e5F9D0bOC83dWZ+nACgwK6X
GXxRbQnZ82da2/yzTGuA2Mg=
=+eAm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
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/>