Joel and Linda:
Unless you have an objection, I will leave Ephemeral-REQ-08 bullet 1 in.
Sue
-----Original Message-----
From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joel Halpern Direct
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 7:50 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; Joel M. Halpern; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [i2rs] ephemeral requirements - REQ 08 bullet 1
I can live with removing it entirely. Others had expressed that they felt
it was important to include.
Yours,
Joel
On 6/1/16 7:48 PM, 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
