I am discussing this very topic in the Ops meeting today at 3. Please come by to discuss.
--Tom On Aug 2, 2012:9:25 AM, at 9:25 AM, Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net> wrote: > All, > > IETF documents have number of mandatory sections .. IANA Actions, Security > Considerations, Refs, etc ... > > Does anyone have a good reason why any new protocol definition or enhancement > does not have a build in mandatory "XML schema" section which would allow to > actually use such standards based enhancement in vendor agnostic way ? > > There is a lot of talk about reinventing APIs, building network wide OS > platform, delivering SDNs (whatever it means at any point of time for one) > ... but how about we start with something very basic yet IMHO necessary to > slowly begin thinking of network as one plane. > > I understand that historically we had/still have SNMP however I have never > seen this being mandatory section of any standards track document. Usually > SNMP comes 5 years behind (if at all) making it obsolete by design. > > NETCONF is great and very flexible communication channel for provisioning. > However it is sufficient to just look at number of ops lists to see that > those who tried to use it quickly abandoned their efforts due to complete > lack of XML schema from each vendor they happen to use or complete mismatch > of vendor to vendor XML interpretation. > > And while perhaps this is obvious I do not think that any new single effort > will address this. This has to be an atomic and integral part of each WG's > document. > > Looking forward for insightful comments ... > > Best, > R. > > >