I understood the proposed text as 'be able to determine whether the protocol implementation supports the mechanisms required by I2RS', which is different from 'needing a reliable communication channel'.
/js On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 11:48:33PM +0000, Linda Dunbar wrote: > Joel, > > Does it hurt if this requirement is removed from the document? > > To me, it is more to say needing a reliable communication channel between > I2RS client and agent (which should be assumed with NETCONF protocol). > Therefore, I don't think we need to have it in the I2RS Ephemeral requirement. > > Linda > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 6:13 PM > To: Linda Dunbar; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [i2rs] ephemeral requirements - REQ 08 bullet 1 > > Linda, the problem is that there is no such thing as an I2RS protocol, much > less version 1 of such a protocol. If I2RS is using NetConf, the protocol is > NetConf. If it is using RestConf, then that is the protocol. > > Further, the exact mechanism to express what the agent can do over these > protocols is defined by those mechanisms. > > I can't argue with your observation that there is not much to the requirement > as reworded. I consider that it is not vacuous because it confirms that we > need the relevant capability information. I recognize that the NetConf and > NetMod working groups have been very good about doing that. > > My primary point, as I have said several times on the list, and saqid on the > webex, is that the requirement as written was not a description of what we > requried, but of a possible (and in my personal view incorrect) way of > meeting the requirement. > > Yours, > Joel > > On 6/1/16 6:48 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > > Joel, > > > > The existing text and the proposed test mean different things to me. The > > existing text is to say support I2RS Version 1, whereas the proposed text > > states a very obvious statement. > > > > If I2RS client didn't have the needed "communication mechanisms" to I2RS > > agent or can't decide if the communications mechanisms needed is supported, > > how can I2RS client even start to send commands to I2RS agent? > > > > Linda > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern > > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 9:48 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [i2rs] ephemeral requirements - REQ 08 bullet 1 > > > > Existing Text: > > 1. protocol version support for I2RS modifications - (e.g. I2RS > > version 1) > > > > Proposed Text: > > 1. Support for communication mechanisms to enable an I2RS client to > > determine that an I2RS agent supports the mechanisms needed for I2RS > > operation. > > > > > > This probably is already met by existing NetConf mechanisms. I think it is > > useful to state anyway, so that solution development will verify that it is > > met. > > > > Yours, > > Joel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > i2rs mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs -- 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
