IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Netconf] Verifing session consensus on RESTCONF as WG item with the maillist

"Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com> Sun, 24 November 2013 14:16 UTC

Return-Path: <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA091AE2A2 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 06:16:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HI69nsTCgPWQ for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 06:16:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 990691AE29A for <netconf@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 06:16:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id rAOEGcX4008918 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <netconf@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 15:16:38 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.34]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id rAOEGbJq005013 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <netconf@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 15:16:38 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC008.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.39) by DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 15:16:37 +0100
Received: from DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net ([169.254.5.220]) by DEMUHTC008.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.39]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 15:16:36 +0100
From: "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
To: Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Verifing session consensus on RESTCONF as WG item with the maillist
Thread-Index: Ac7ocFsZdTW+Dcs3QRWqtmjne84RSwAr1t1A
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 14:16:36 +0000
Message-ID: <E4DE949E6CE3E34993A2FF8AE79131F81FE2BA@DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.159.42.119]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E4DE949E6CE3E34993A2FF8AE79131F81FE2BADEMUMBX005nsnintr_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-size: 4800
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1385302598-000022AE-D44230F8/0-0/0-0
Subject: [Netconf] Verifing session consensus on RESTCONF as WG item with the maillist
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 14:16:51 -0000

Dear Netconf WG,

in the Netconf session during IETF #88 we discussed the RESTCONF protocol and whether it should be developed in the Netconf WG. There were around 60 participants in the room.
The authors of the RESTCONF draft do not want to create a protocol which competes with NETCONF and it is seen as beneficial if NETCONF and RESTCONF are developed in parallel and aligned with each other. There are obviously different projects outside of IETF (e.g. OpenDaylight and other MANET oriented projects) which use RESTCONF. The opinion poll showed that there is a huge support of the people in the room (and nobody against) to develop the RESTCONF protocol in the Netconf WG. As a result of the discussion with the AD, the WG chairs got the action to prepare a charter update and adopt RESTCONF as the new WG item.

Though before we do this, the chairs need to verify the consensus in the session with the maillist.

Following text is proposed to use for the charter update:
"  3. Develop a RESTful protocol (RESTCONF) that provides a programmatic interface for accessing data defined in YANG, using the datastores defined in NETCONF. The three parts concerning RESTCONF protocol, the transport binding over HTTP and the YANG patch operation will be prepared modular and in separate drafts. This enables to add a new transport binding at a later stage."

Please state your opinion on this step forward.
If you have strong objections against please state your substantial and convincing arguments.

This consensus call will close on December 4, 2013 EOB PT.

Mehmet & Bert

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email