[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
example notification seems redundant
- To: "Netconf (E-mail)" <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
- Subject: example notification seems redundant
- From: Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:36:36 -0700
- User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)
Hi,
The examples in the notification draft aren't
very clear. It seems like they must be intended
for a session other than the one that made the change,
because all of the info is redundant -- it would be implied
by an <ok>in the rpc-reply, or explicitly identified in the
<rpc-error> elements returned in the rpc-reply.
So why would config changes (ok or error) need to come right
back on the same session, duplicated in the form of a notification?
Wouldn't side effects (e.g., notification that says BGP4 started)
normally be monitored anyway by some notification receiver app?
Andy
--
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/>