IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Basic ietf process question ...

mrex@sap.com (Martin Rex) Fri, 03 August 2012 19:29 UTC

Return-Path: <mrex@sap.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E416F21E8043 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 60tHPV9oHlcT for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpde02.sap-ag.de (smtpde02.sap-ag.de [155.56.68.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F2921E8042 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:29:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sap.corp by smtpde02.sap-ag.de (26) with ESMTP id q73JTR1D029117 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 3 Aug 2012 21:29:32 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: Re: Basic ietf process question ...
In-Reply-To: <501AA9DF.6010208@raszuk.net>
To: robert@raszuk.net
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2012 21:29:27 +0200
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL125 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20120803192927.14BCC1A117@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
From: mrex@sap.com
X-SAP: out
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mrex@sap.com
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2012 19:30:00 -0000

Robert Raszuk wrote:
> 
> I understand that historically we had/still have SNMP however I have 
> never seen this being mandatory section of any standards track document. 
> Usually SNMP comes 5 years behind (if at all) making it obsolete by design.
> 
> NETCONF is great and very flexible communication channel for 
> provisioning. However it is sufficient to just look at number of ops 
> lists to see that those who tried to use it quickly abandoned their 
> efforts due to complete lack of XML schema from each vendor they happen 
> to use or complete mismatch of vendor to vendor XML interpretation.

There seems to be a network management protocol in active use
for CPE networking gear:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TR-069

that is based on SOAP (ie WebService using XML).

-Martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email