RE: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-netconf-notification-01.txt]

["Hector Trevino \(htrevino\)" <htrevino@cisco.com>]

Thanks, we'll make the updates.
Hector
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 8:16 AM
> To: Andy Bierman; Netconf (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-netconf-notification-01.txt]
> 
> I did a first skim over this document.
> 
> Here is an initial set of admin/consitency comments (i.e.
> no real technical review comments yet):
> 
> - This document should align itself with the approved NetConf
>   documents and use the same terminology. For example:
>   - figure 1: change "Application Protocol" into "Transport Protocol"
>   - sect 5 title should be: Mapping to Transport Protocols
>     Best to check the whole doc for "application protocol" and
>     change accordingly.
> - consistency within document, for example:
>   - sect 5.1 page 25
>           <event-class><configuration/><audit/></event-classes>
>     is it event-class or event-classes?
>     or is it eventClass as per the following on page 27:
>           <eventClass><configuration/><audit/></eventClass>
>   - sect 3.4.1 seems to contradict the description under 
> "Named Profile"
>     in sections 2.1.1 and 2.3.1
>   - I see
>       <capability>
>         urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0
>       </capability>
>     and
>         xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0
>     and
>        <rpc message-id="101"
>         xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:event:1.0">
>     So there seems to be inconsistency here?
> 
> Bert
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org]On
> > Behalf Of Andy Bierman
> > Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 03:15
> > To: Netconf (E-mail)
> > Subject: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-netconf-notification-01.txt]
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > A new version of the NETCONF Notifications draft is out.
> > 
> > I would really like to see some detailed reviews of this draft.  If 
> > you want notifications in netconf, then you need to read this draft 
> > and make sure this is exactly how you want notifications 
> done.  If it 
> > isn't, or text is unclear or incorrect, then tell the WG.
> > 
> > If you don't want notifications in netconf, then that would 
> be good to 
> > know too.  Silence means lack of interest, not acceptance.
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 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/>
> 

--
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/>