Phil Shafer wrote:
Andy Bierman writes:IMO, this should be handled with a different top-level element than <rpc>, outside the scope of the NETCONF protocol.So is another scenario where the generic RPC mechanism we defined in NETCONF can't be used?
It is a matter of SHOULD be used rather than CAN be used. IMO the transport details should be taken care of before the NETCONF session mechanisms (rpc, rpc-reply, notification) are used.
Thanks, Phil
Andy -- 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/>