IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] Draft Charter Proposal for NETCONF WG

Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> Fri, 03 March 2017 17:42 UTC

Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.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 3C17F1294CD for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 09:42:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 cUGxz8w5-Fhm for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 09:42:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3345B129428 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 09:42:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1623; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1488562924; x=1489772524; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qsMq/GKiRNgIDK9mTk0aJLlBlchNw1aVPabdPsrij7U=; b=DD0rzgwtKL8X0XEwCNtvf5Liwos7ZO8boCwy3tzJO2R/mByugXs2hO2m nw8BJ+9fKeBjb+GYDm0O5FOZR6CaJ8wwJHrnz6XjwsNL6vXz5vcvZbVvA 13e4T3YoTXlJWOiQKssbidBHj1WTeDVgb5JZ1BhccbHxYY4aBhvik/yiY Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BwBgDHqblY/xbLJq1eGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBhDIDJ2COW5BTiA2NKoINHwuFLkoCgyIXAQIBAQEBAQEBYiiEcAEBAQMBAQE2NgsMBAsQBQECJwchBh8RBgEMBgIBAYlfAw0IDrVJhy4Ng0cBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEdhk6CBYJqglGHaAEEm3I6hnaHFIQpgk6IAIZRilNfiAkgATaBAyIVCBcVP4RUHYFjQDaKDgEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,237,1484006400"; d="scan'208";a="692685980"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Mar 2017 17:42:00 +0000
Received: from [10.61.228.19] ([10.61.228.19]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v23Hfx8l002116; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 17:41:59 GMT
To: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>, Mehmet Ersue <mersue@gmail.com>, 'Juergen Schoenwaelder' <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
References: <014101d2913a$3db72870$b9257950$@gmail.com> <070e01d291ba$9bb8f4a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <m2fuiye8rj.fsf@birdie.labs.nic.cz> <072D22E1-66DA-414E-BD16-C43D36BE9B6E@juniper.net> <026e01d29273$5cc0cfc0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5A12F60C-3BA9-41A2-B77C-9E73B9DA115D@juniper.net> <05c201d2941a$d4bd4500$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <20170303133448.GA3133@elstar.local> <00b201d2942b$32395b50$96ac11f0$@gmail.com> <016f01d29443$ed880600$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <f4cb1a20-6d87-8b3f-c3ee-5be104a6dbd8@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 17:41:58 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <016f01d29443$ed880600$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/mgDLX3HX0SdWisMsskJ-Y0Ygb6o>
Cc: 'Netconf' <netconf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] Draft Charter Proposal for NETCONF WG
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 17:42:06 -0000


On 03/03/2017 17:18, t.petch wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mehmet Ersue" <mersue@gmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 2:33 PM
>
>
>>> Back to your question, it seems obvious to me that YANG and the XML
>> encoding rules naturally belong to NETMOD, the 'NETCONF protocol
> details
>> that NETCONF
>>> did not define' naturally belong to NETCONF.
>> Basically it is our aim to make the YANG language specification
> generally
>> applicable to all protocols and to put protocol-specific details into
> the
>> protocol specifications.
> See my response to Juergen; I agree with you but I define XML as not
> being a protocol and so XML would remain; and I think that YANG will
> have to say something about operations on the data it defines, just that
> they are defined as an abstract 'create', 'delete' etc and not as the
> set that NETCONF currently offers.
FWIW, this is the block
"      Common protocol abstraction
(that all YANG protocols should conform to). "

That I was referring to in the diagram that I gave previously, although 
I was suggesting that should belong in NETCONF WG rather than in YANG.

Rob

>
> Tom Petch
>
>> Mehmet
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-
>>> university.de]
>>> Sent: Friday, March 3, 2017 2:35 PM
>>> To: t.petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>
>>> Cc: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>; Mehmet Ersue
> <snip>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
> .
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email