Re: Ever onward

[Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>]

>>>>> On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:05:10 -0500, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> said:

>> I've brought this up multiple times during meetings and argued that
>> a default different port should be created for each transports
>> which differs from the standard one, and the populace has always
>> said "we should just make sure it *can* be configured to be on a
>> different port".  So, by default out of the box netconf boxes are
>> supposed to accept netconf/ssh over ssh until an operator
>> configures it differently.  Thus, a border firewall can't be
>> configured to disallow management traffic to the network assuming
>> that legitimate ssh connections should be allowed through (which is
>> most commonly the case).

Eliot> Great argument for NETCONF/BEEP.

Any and all transports could pick a netconf specific port to use.  It
was simply decided that this wouldn't be done (except, I guess, for
BEEP).  But its not BEEP that matters.  It's the different port, and
there is nothing wrong with attaching the other protocols to other
ports too.  The authors just didn't want to do it.

-- 
"In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap,
 and much more difficult to find."  -- Terry Pratchett

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>