IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] Draft Charter Proposal for NETCONF WG

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Wed, 01 March 2017 01:44 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 97F13129408 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:44:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 FwwYHz8fVWrI for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:44:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com (mail-wm0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9201E1289C4 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:44:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id v186so98919573wmd.0 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:44:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WUj2cV6wlFuVi8/7zhxW4RehTmEBqQZc8OlWDP19wf4=; b=z1WeDLye1qXHXVGn6qJDOrJICrnr8SJAuXnfoeJoKXk3AkUuD/b9DVD6QnS/YdHP3E eMKVyqh40i9PKeDpf491/2VLahbhcqh+EPGJWWiS5KlhwVkYSO3+30NKgtxpd28+SVwb N5GLBqYEpMpVFdfOYf4xuAIi4EfZSu5ZEH+YAhTSrRGD8Hf42VOsoR7TkVmYxSS7wZ18 2TaJcqqbmQpFBiOUmmeHbokQCBaD89z2lEj7ibyqqUBKAdui1AVN5rEf3+T0ruLcXQpG PqoTIhc3zh+N57via+clpjpF3VP46SiqiLyCKue0nWylkahudUQrJ1nEYANSBXBx4SgM WAGw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WUj2cV6wlFuVi8/7zhxW4RehTmEBqQZc8OlWDP19wf4=; b=kBn+w2OKenYf64T7ySvRemaeN0CZZyDrhizpe1goPsYuLcqvgK4MNf3yWvRFvbntyH DRwd3t9qciJnPcMJ08cRUlA0U1+xRLpEdUaN/XkrWmMqpP7ynjC3lWRaue3tsszlw5wB QdUPkTYBha2fkuRUTL96COxd0gWezs6SsCpFpqLDeiVZLryoT/ABZQJwPpsg5uUi8Qlr Dqpkyf8AsBzDklfOa5LRR0QFf/1zvrNS7X86hlQfINYlIcVUDDlquai6QplzLg2eHNg2 OsF0o7OxZ7yB3ke0uTlgLUmxY7EfU8/g+xOkxTsd4JJTsNSwaZgXjjCWNZOchfrP2iHF JNfg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mnW9ioejdF6LxFjgCMlst5mTiOL95/nJYtDfyue1HsHz/iHCngvLY7DK8cnGDsCYasirvHwjj8XOixaQ==
X-Received: by 10.28.46.74 with SMTP id u71mr1011990wmu.136.1488332677065; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:44:37 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.165.154 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:44:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHTFi55qg7F5LMVUcEkuwtvsT6+mDJ=qPZ_H=rA1phdyAg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <014101d2913a$3db72870$b9257950$@gmail.com> <CABCOCHTFi55qg7F5LMVUcEkuwtvsT6+mDJ=qPZ_H=rA1phdyAg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:44:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CABCOCHS3aHrJfT7LNQ-2+Z0LnVH9GMhoC+e+RnEobAygqaDWxg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mehmet Ersue <mersue@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1142453c8643090549a1740f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/nce2D4KN_cKtqWhN5WbAzBeFUpE>
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: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 01:44:40 -0000

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote:

> ....
>>
>> Sep 2017          WGLC for NETCONF and RESTCONF bis documents
>>
>> Oct 2017          Submit to NETCONF and RESTCONF bis documents AD/IESG
>> for consideration as Proposed Standard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> I am opposed to creating new versions of NETCONF or RESTCONF at this time.
> I do not see anything in the charter that cannot be defined in RFCs that
> update (not obsolete)
> the existing protocols.  Both are designed to allow new functionality to be
> added and advertised as capabilities.
>
>
I should clarify this comment.
NETCONF was last published in June 2011 so it is not unreasonable to
do a new version.  But all protocol features should be on the table.
There is a list (in case you have an important feature to add to the list)

https://github.com/netconf-wg/rfc6241bis/issues

If the scope is just support for revised datastores, then than can go in
its own RFC.
If the scope is applying the lessons we have learned since June 2011 to make
NETCONF much better, then 6241bis is appropriate.

RESTCONF was published a month ago so a new version should not be in scope.


> Andy
>
>
Andy


> _______________________________________________
>> Netconf mailing list
>> Netconf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>>
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email