Hi Ranga, Sorry for the pre-mature send.
> On 1 Jul 2019, at 20:51, M. Ranganathan <[email protected]> wrote: > > What is the essential difference between a device declaring itself to be a > "controller" for another class and the situation where the device (being > controlled) just uses the "model" abstraction in an ACE? > You could indeed do this with “model”. The reason I hadn’t thought of that was because in my mind, same-manufacturer and model were for NxN communications, and that it might be a hint to the NMS to use appropriate scale mechanisms. But that’s not actually in the text. I think, by the way, that there’s another reason to think about doing this from the controller side: if the standards are open like we like them to be, a device may not know who should be the controller for a particular device or class. Eliot
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
