[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Difference between get and get-config
- To: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
- Subject: Re: Difference between get and get-config
- From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
- Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 08:36:01 +0200
- Cc: Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>, Johan Rydberg <johan.rydberg@edgeware.tv>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, netconf@ops.ietf.org
- In-reply-to: <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030F3B@wabex2.sharpamericas.com>
- Mail-followup-to: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>, Johan Rydberg <johan.rydberg@edgeware.tv>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, netconf@ops.ietf.org
- References: <4655D06F.8000109@andybierman.com> <FCC7D7D1DB94054EB491EED9D274727D030F3B@wabex2.sharpamericas.com>
- Reply-to: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06)
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:20:57PM -0700, McDonald, Ira wrote:
> I find it disturbing (but not surprising) that Andy
> and Martin suggested two different errors (and two
> different underlying reasons).
Ira,
it usually takes implementation experience to work out all the corner
cases attached to a protocol design. NETCONF is a Proposed Standard
and if we take our standards process as it was conceived, then finding
these sorts of inconsistencies is exactly what is expected to happen
at this stage of the protocol lifecycle. So I do not at all find this
disturbing - for me, these are encouraging signs that people are
building up decent implementation experience.
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
--
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/>