Re: Pre-release 2 of Notification Update

["tom.petch" <cfinss@dial.pipex.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Bierman" <ietf@andybierman.com>
To: "tom.petch" <cfinss@dial.pipex.com>
Cc: "Sharon Chisholm" <schishol@nortel.com>; "Netconf (E-mail)"
<netconf@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: Pre-release 2 of Notification Update

<snip>
>
> The filter seems fine to me being defined against
> conceptual XML instances.  A filter is defined
> with XML or Xpath, so there is no ambiguity about
> internal or on-the-wire formats.
>

Andy

If you do not say whether the filter is applied to what is on the wire, eg to
lift Martin's example,
<ncn:notification xmlns:ncn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:notification:1.0">
    <linkUp xmlns="http://example.com/ns/interface";>
      <ncn:eventTime>2007-08-17T08:56:05</ncn:eventTime>
      <ifIndex>3</ifIndex>
    </linkUp>
  </ncn:notification>
in which at least part of the XML node structure is defined in the -notification
I-D:

or whether the filter is applied to some internal format where exactly the same
XML elements may appear in a completely different structure, then my word for
that is ambiguity, which may lead to a lack of interoperability.  Which I would
like to eliminate

The current proposed wording talks of <notification> without saying in which XML
documents the <notification> element appears and where it appears is what I
would like nailed down.

Tom Petch
>
> Andy
<snip>


--
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/>