Re: [OPS-AREA] RE: Comments on XSDMI BoF proposal

Thanks for the clarification, lets see what Dave says.  If it is as you 
say, then I would say what is the justification for introducing 
duplication of information?
/jon

Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
>  
>  
>  
>  
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> 	From: Jon Saperia [mailto:[email protected]] 
> 	
>
> 			XML-based management leverages lessons learned
> from the WWW. 
> 			While document-based rather than command-based,
> tasks can 
> 			often be grouped into a document-type interface,
> such as a 
> 			web page. With automated translation from XML
> into HTML (and 
> 			related technologies), we can work on developing
>
> 			task-based-document NM interfaces. 
> 			
> 			I think we need to spend more time thinking
> about operator 
> 			use-cases, not just technical designs of SMIs. I
> think it 
> 			would help to start thinking in terms of modular
> data models 
> 			similar to MIB modules, not just a <running>
> config,  but we 
> 			need to develop an SMI that helps to
> differentiate config and 
> 			state info, which SMIv2 doesn't do, Maybe all we
> need to do 
> 			is recommend that MIB modules have separate
> subtrees for 
> 			config and for state, much as we now recommend
> separate 
> 			subtrees for objects and notifications. 
> 			    
>
> 		
> 		Maybe, but at this point in time all the base of
> standard MIB modules is
> 		not designed this way. What are we going to do, re-write
> these MIB
> 		modules, or part of them? This does not seem an
> achievable task. 
> 		  
>
>
> 	I have seen a couple of references in the discussion to State
> and netconf.  Can we be more specific about what we mean by state here.
> Configuration state?  When I think of other types of state such as
> operational state or quality state I think of either read MIB objects or
> notifications (traps/informs).
> 	[DR]  
> 	[DR] My interpretation was state as in state of the system which
> is the super-set of configuration state, but not limited to
> configuration state. It is David however who introduced the term in the
> thread, so I would rather have him answer. 
> 	 
> 	Dan
> 	 
> 	
> 	
>
>
>   

-- 
Jon Saperia
(cell) 617-201-2655
(Eve.) 978-461-0264



_______________________________________________
OPS-NM mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm