[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FW: [NGO] Netconf-Proxy

David B Harrington wrote:

Hi,

I didn't say anybody had tried to add proxy to Netconf, or that it was
desirable.

You made a statement that operators said they HATED SNMP proxy. I
wanted to see documentation of that statement from operators. Or is
that just your opinion? I'd like ti to be clear whether it is
aomething the operators said or something you said.


I heard 2 operators at the IAB NM workshop say that, including Randy Bush.
The concerns were over increased system complexity without sufficient gain.
I'm not sure why we need to discuss SNMP proxy on this list,
since nobody is actually suggesting that a proxy mechanism
needs to be added to the NETCONF protocol.




dbh


Andy




-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Bierman [mailto:ietf@andybierman.com] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 7:50 PM 
To: David B Harrington
Cc: 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Netconf (E-mail)'; P.Batroff@gmx.net
Subject: Re: FW: [NGO] Netconf-Proxy

David B Harrington wrote:

Hi,
Is that operator opinion documented somewhere? I checked 
RFC3535, the
IAB Workshop on Network Management, but found no mention of 
proxy. Was

that input captured in some netconf meeting minutes?
no - the discussion at the IAB NM workshop did not make it into RFC 3535. Nobody has ever seriously suggested adding a proxy mechanism to NETCONF, 
similar to SNMP Proxy.



dbh


Andy


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andy Bierman 
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 10:35 AM
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Cc: Netconf (E-mail); P.Batroff@gmx.net
Subject: Re: FW: [NGO] Netconf-Proxy

Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
This question is probably more within the scope of netconf 
rather than
ngo. 
Dan




-----Original Message-----
From: Philipp Batroff [mailto:P.Batroff@gmx.net] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 4:16 PM 
To: ngo@ietf.org
Subject: [NGO] Netconf-Proxy

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

hello,
i have the Problem, that iam developing a box (similar to a 
proxy) with
a Netconf-agent, which redirects request to several 
different agents.

The problem is, that this box has just one IP-address.
How can I divide between the different agents? Is there a 
wrapper, where
i can specify the "target" behind that proxy, or is there 
anything else

possible?
I want to stay conform with the Netconf standard.

You can put whatever XML attributes you want in the <rpc>

element.

NETCONF has no concept of proxy. Operators told us they hate
SNMP Proxy and want nothing like it in NETCONF.

Andy


Thank you and greets Phil
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGyZQO9Os+BmHRimYRAoHrAJ4sKkIPPXRy6OlX12FsIwQz/kaVnQCcDlLV
P1//yS1JJKXNfKh6mFtiyis=
=wcc5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
NGO@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo

--
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/>



--
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/>











--
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/>





--
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/>