Re: NETCONF modelled in UML

["Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>]

Hi -


> From: "Andy Bierman" <abierman@cisco.com>
> To: "Nathan Sowatskey" <nsowatsk@cisco.com>
> Cc: <netconf@ops.ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 10:14 AM
> Subject: Re: NETCONF modelled in UML
...
> These remind me of the ASI stuff in the SNMPv3 documents.
> We should focus only on the semantics and syntax of messages
> on the wire, and stay away from implementation interfaces
...

Although this is a tangential issue, this statement
is too easily read in a way leading to serious
misconceptions.

The ASIs are *NOT* implementation interfaces.
RFC 3411 is abundantly clear on this point:

  The abstract service interfaces are intended to help clarify
   the externally observable behavior of SNMP entities, and are not
   intended to constrain the structure or organization of
   implementations in any way.  Most specifically, they should not be
   interpreted as APIs or as requirements statements for APIs.

Randy



--
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/>