I am discussing this very topic in the Ops meeting today at 3. Please
come by to discuss.
--Tom
On Aug 2, 2012:9:25 AM, at 9:25 AM, Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> All,
>
> IETF documents have number of mandatory sections .. IANA Actions, Security
> Considerations, Refs, etc ...
>
> Does anyone have a good reason why any new protocol definition or enhancement
> does not have a build in mandatory "XML schema" section which would allow to
> actually use such standards based enhancement in vendor agnostic way ?
>
> There is a lot of talk about reinventing APIs, building network wide OS
> platform, delivering SDNs (whatever it means at any point of time for one)
> ... but how about we start with something very basic yet IMHO necessary to
> slowly begin thinking of network as one plane.
>
> I understand that historically we had/still have SNMP however I have never
> seen this being mandatory section of any standards track document. Usually
> SNMP comes 5 years behind (if at all) making it obsolete by design.
>
> NETCONF is great and very flexible communication channel for provisioning.
> However it is sufficient to just look at number of ops lists to see that
> those who tried to use it quickly abandoned their efforts due to complete
> lack of XML schema from each vendor they happen to use or complete mismatch
> of vendor to vendor XML interpretation.
>
> And while perhaps this is obvious I do not think that any new single effort
> will address this. This has to be an atomic and integral part of each WG's
> document.
>
> Looking forward for insightful comments ...
>
> Best,
> R.
>
>
>
