I agree with you Andy, I think the draft still is not clear,

AB

On 6/23/13, Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If an I2RS client wants to set up a tunnel between 2 routers
> (as a lame example), does it send 1 request to 1 I2RS agent
> or 2 requests, 1 to each I2RS agent/router?  If 1 request, is the
> southbound
> protocol between the I2RS agent and at least 1 router proprietary
> or part of the standard?
>
> I think this draft should be clear about what is in scope.
> It seems to say that the southbound protocol is out of scope.
>
>
> Andy
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Abdussalam Baryun <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I beleive if any thing not shown then they are not allowed by I2RS, if
>> it is shown then it is the way the I2RS will work to solve the
>> problem. So I will understand that I2RS client does not talk to NE but
>> only to the agent, that is why I suggest that we don't show any sign
>> that the client can talk to any other as long it is out of scope.
>> Therefore the drawing methodology (figure 1) is : (if out of scope of
>> the protocol then should not be shown, and if future work of protocol
>> it may be shown).
>>
>> AB
>>
>> On 6/22/13, Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I just re-read the framework and problem statement drafts.
>> > Only 1 minor issue in the problem statement draft:
>> >
>> > The 'I2RS Agent' is shown as a single box in figure 1.
>> >
>> >  1) Does this mean the protocol between the "broker" and the
>> >      NEs is proprietary, or just not shown?
>> >
>> >  2) Does this mean that an I2RS Client never talks directly to an NE
>> >      or does it mean all I2RS Agent functionality is available on all
>> NEs?
>> >
>> > Nit, sec. 6, para 4:
>> >    - the lack of standard data models is the problem of the NETMOD WG,
>> >      not really the NETCONF protocol.
>> >    - s/may help define needed/may require help defining needed/
>> >
>> >
>> > Andy
>> >
>>
>
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to