IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] netconf call home connection type

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Mon, 27 August 2018 08:23 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.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 2E989128C65 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 01:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y5ZU3kPhWusR for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 01:23:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17959130E7B for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 01:23:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.61]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C5EE1AE0312; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 10:23:00 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 10:22:59 +0200
Message-Id: <20180827.102259.1593150619522594759.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: kwatsen@juniper.net
Cc: netconf@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <D0590BA6-F5CB-4F38-A3C2-E5FB263FB766@juniper.net>
References: <95225F7A-6972-4A55-A5A2-0D287050A26D@juniper.net> <20180822.105858.356632119713936966.mbj@tail-f.com> <D0590BA6-F5CB-4F38-A3C2-E5FB263FB766@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/C8G8WCRUwuNS2GxTwFmkvx-znvQ>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] netconf call home connection type
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:23:02 -0000

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote:
> >> Actually, since we're adding a feature for "periodic", we might
> >> want to also add a feature for "persistent".  This would be
> >> similar to how we're having features for both keystore-supported
> >> and local-keys-supported.  Thoughts?
> >
> > I don't think that we need features for these mechanisms.  Both
> > should be quite trivial to implement.
> 
> Too bad you weren't at the meeting ;)
> 
> You won't get much of an argument from me.  After all, my slide said:
> 
>      Periodic connections are incredibly useful and, by not having a
>   feature, we might nudge the industry into supporting them more.
> 
> And, if you think it's trivial, then why not, right?   Hmmm, well,
> what if a device really only wants to support one type?  Is that
> a likely scenario?

I would think that the operator wants the flexibility to decide this,
not the device programmer.


/martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email