Re: [Netconf] RFC4743 and RFC4744 (Netconf over SOAP and BEEP) to historic

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Wed, 05 September 2012 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854B821F8468 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 08:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.377
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.377 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, J_CHICKENPOX_65=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WUJZcnMwToBj for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 08:02:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-f172.google.com (mail-qc0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2534421F846B for <netconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 08:02:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qcac10 with SMTP id c10so149167qca.31 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 08:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=1PMtdYpqPYm45OlkxqaArYJWJ+RYUHltQ/BC4YQihok=; b=pkhedg5jtYncasMkxE/JSXooqv96SB4RzPQAY269SVoW3JacWonQSWigKKsMsZcBwO rGXaXJu1scrPMWqPExF2AfXPps6cETrDsqh4KJ4s+YiTWVD4Lxxp2ZxmwzcxvcxQIuLI JG8KEhSdAB5B+xjGP7MC+dtaf7/8GfmcUD2qkLUPDT6GklDzQ1C8gBJOnet6FRkPmACS Lz84A2FApe4k7xlVcUERQQvEWKesSYO0XJlw9tE3kX6sXNvHcGuVL+aXiw2Jw2T1JbHn ECyFURrZwIrNGzS+LPGqATEkrDHmEj4JoP2ywVIOhtCAAXJF+oTjk75aDbcXLQP8aXRe WeSg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.44.202 with SMTP id b10mr17697970qaf.2.1346857352391; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 08:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.49.35.230 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 08:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <504764C4.5030805@cisco.com>
References: <500929D1.3070107@bwijnen.net> <504764C4.5030805@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 08:02:32 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHTEYR2JQuXTAskTkEwKk-FW-1s02TpQMn81zYwevbpZbw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmLVeJBx45PF8WafmsP8cg4BLXnm+8jDcoNfgfxSYJzFJTSdn0HG18i49fhi3l2CWOILFjd
Cc: netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] RFC4743 and RFC4744 (Netconf over SOAP and BEEP) to historic
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 15:02:34 -0000

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote:
> Bert,
>
> While the new charter proposal follows its procedure, may I suggest that you
> post this draft.
> All the current energy in NETCONF could be used to expedite this draft.
>

I hope we follow a process where we articulate and agree on
the problems we are attempting to solve, instead of the usual
"here's my solution draft, standardize it".

We also learned a thing or 2 about operational state with MIBs
over 20+ years and I hope we don't ignore that.  E.g., we have to
pick our discontinuity timestamp, such as /system/clock/current-datetime.
Some NETCONF systems have no SNMP agent, so sysUpTime
is not appropriate. Also <get> returns everything. That was a mistake
from the start. We could have <get2> return just config=false.  Simple.

IMO the WG is looking for an ocean to boil wrt/ operational state,
and ignoring the little details that could make a difference right away.


> Regards, Benoit.

Andy

>
>
>> Can't submit a rev 00 I-D at the moment.
>>
>> But since we have the "making RFC4743 and RFC4744 to Historic"
>> topic as part of a possible revised WG charter on the agenda,
>> I did quickly do an initial writeup, so people can see how
>> we might approach this.
>>
>> I have it attached below.
>>
>> Bert
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> netconf                                                        B. Wijnen
>> Internet-Draft                                             July 19, 2012
>> Obsoletes: 4743/4744 (if approved)
>> Intended status: Informational
>> Expires: January 20, 2013
>>
>>
>>                  RFC4743 and RFC4744 to Historic status
>>           draft-bwijnen-netconf-rfc4743-rfc4744-to-historic-00
>>
>> Abstract
>>
>>    This document moves RFC4743 (Using NETCONF over the Simple Object
>>    Access Protocol (SOAP)) and RFC4744 (Using the NETCONF Protocol over
>>    the Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP)) to HISTORIC status to
>>    reflect the fact that those two documents have shown very little (if
>>    any) implementations and deployment.  Furthermore, no-one in the
>>    NETCONF WG is nterested or volunteering to work on them anymore.
>>
>> Status of this Memo
>>
>>    This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
>>    provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
>>
>>    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
>>    Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
>>    working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
>>    Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
>>
>>    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
>>    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
>>    time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
>>    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
>>
>>    This Internet-Draft will expire on January 20, 2013.
>>
>> Copyright Notice
>>
>>    Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
>>    document authors.  All rights reserved.
>>
>>    This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
>>    Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
>>    (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
>>    publication of this document.  Please review these documents
>>    carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
>>    to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
>>    include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
>>
>>
>>
>> Wijnen                  Expires January 20, 2013 [Page 1]
>>
>> Internet-Draft          RFC4743-RFC4744-historic July 2012
>>
>>
>>    the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
>>    described in the Simplified BSD License.
>>
>>
>> Table of Contents
>>
>>    1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
>>    2.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
>>    3.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
>>    4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
>>    5.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
>>      5.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
>>      5.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
>>    Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wijnen                  Expires January 20, 2013 [Page 2]
>>
>> Internet-Draft          RFC4743-RFC4744-historic July 2012
>>
>>
>> 1.  Introduction
>>
>>    This document moves RFC 4743 [RFC4743] and RFC 4744 [RFC4744] to
>>    HISTORIC status in accordance with RFC 2026 [RFC2026].  These have
>>    seen very little (if any) implementations or deployment, and none of
>>    the initial proponents are active in the NETCONF space anymorei.  No-
>>    one (else) in the WG is interested or willing to pick up
>>    responsibility for these documents.  Possibly changes might be needed
>>    for compatibility with NETCONF 1.1.
>>
>>    In the WG nobody gave a positive response when asked who is using it
>>    or wants to keep it.
>>
>>
>> 2.  Acknowledgements
>>
>>    Thanks to the original editors/authors of RFC4743 and RFC4744. At
>>    the time, these NETCONF transports seemed to be attractive.
>>
>>
>> 3.  IANA Considerations
>>
>>    This memo includes no request to IANA.
>>
>>
>> 4.  Security Considerations
>>
>>    This draft introduces no new security considerations.
>>
>>
>> 5.  References
>>
>> 5.1.  Normative References
>>
>>    [RFC4743]  Goddard, T., "Using NETCONF over the Simple Object Access
>>               Protocol (SOAP)", RFC 4743, December 2006.
>>
>>    [RFC4744]  Lear, E. and K. Crozier, "Using the NETCONF Protocol over
>>               the Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP)", RFC 4744,
>>               December 2006.
>>
>> 5.2.  Informative References
>>
>>    [RFC2026]  Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
>>               3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wijnen                  Expires January 20, 2013 [Page 3]
>>
>> Internet-Draft          RFC4743-RFC4744-historic July 2012
>>
>>
>> Author's Address
>>
>>    Bert Wijnen
>>    Schagen 33
>>    Linschoten,   3461 GL
>>    Netherlands
>>
>>    Phone: +31 348-407-775
>>    Email: bertietf@bwijnen.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wijnen                  Expires January 20, 2013 [Page 4]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Netconf mailing list
>> Netconf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf