On Apr 18, 2014, at 9:33 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim <h...@mojatatu.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Jan Medved (jmedved) <jmed...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > [..] > >> I actually think it is - what's wrong with working code? ;-) > > Unless you have _working_ I2RS code - this is a meaningless statement to > make. > How about we strive to show up with some working I2RS code at the next > meeting? > Jamal, What is working i2rs code? From Juniper perspective, I can claim having PoC i2rs code, as I can dynamically create REST APIs (will not call them RESTconf, as it has only partial compliance with current RESTconf draft) based on the service described on the device. The PoC functionally is very close i2rs architecture document and with that can see what services can be created and abstracted for i2rs. So for i2rs, as long I can create a data model for a service, where the service is simple as add or delete route and can programmatically consume that service, it is i2rs. Many vendors today can do that with NETCONF/RESTCONF/YANG and we are voicing our preference for that. Dean _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list i2rs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
