On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 03:34:34PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 03:02:26PM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > > In my personal view, it is clearly outside of our remit to reinvent > > logging, no matter whether we like it or not. > > Agreed. Not in-scope for I2RS currently. > > Where would you suggest such work be done? > > > As such, the structural specificity of a YANG model (or ABNF) simply > > does not belong in this document. The clarity about what fields > > will be logged is needed. > > Would you agree that if the yang module is dropped that the info model is > sufficiently clear for I2RS purposes? >
I have been silently following this discussion and I do not have a strong opinion but I think it might help to understand that a) NETCONF has a notification mechanism (RFC 5277), and b) SYSLOG has in its standards-track version support for carrying structured data (RFC 5424). /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
