Re: [netconf] Adoption call for draft-kwatsen-netconf-http-client-server-04

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Martin,

> I think it is quite clear that the WG doesn't want more delays.  

Is it?   I only know that Balazs K. wishes to have the first three drafts (crypto-types, truststore, and keystore) completed soon.  The Nokia/BBF folks were interested in netconf-server, but forked long ago.  Otherwise, I'm unaware of anyone stating a preference.   For myself, I only hope to achieve a good result.


> So I think that either we simply don't add this grouping *at this point*,
> and define the necessary nodes in the higher-level modules, even
> though it is not perfect; or we define the "restful" module with these
> groupings, even though that is also perhaps not perfect.

ietf-restful-client and ietf-restful-server sound nice, but not so much in a stack:

    tcp-server-parameters : { ... },
    tls-server-parameters : { ... },
    restful-server-parameters : { ... },        <---- end-user says "what's that?"
    restconf-server-parameters : { ... }

or (for https-notif)

    tcp-client-parameters : { ... },
    tls-client-parameters : { ... },
    restful-client-parameters : { ... }    <---- end-user says "what's that?"


Actually, the above is purposely inaccurate.   If you recall, we switched to having container-less groupings, thus the consuming module can name the container whatever it wants, so the net-net is no impact other than changing the import and uses statements.   Though I still don't know why we should do even this, given the lack of any response to my Oct 30th message.


Kent // contributor