Re: [Standards] NetConf over XMPP
Hello Michel, I am interested in this activity. Please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Amin
Re: [Standards] NetConf over XMPP
Dier Michal, I'm interested in this activity in terms of machine-to-machine communication/configuration over XMPP. Regards, Yusuke (2013-05-30 16:04), Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote: Hello I'm working with protocol called NetConf (RFC 6241) now. The protocol can be used to configure devices remotely over something more standardized than web interface or ssh & command line utilities (which is good for people but not for automated scripts). The protocol uses XML messages and defines several transport layers to work on top of (SSH, TLS socket, …). It seems like a reasonable idea to define a transport over XMPP, which has several advantages (like you don't need 1000 ssh sessions to configure 1000 devices on your client, there's single point where we could define who is allowed to do the configuration, etc). Also, it could be used to configure software as well (XMPP bots, for example), with possibly better UI than the ad-hoc commands. I brought the idea with my boss today that I'd like to do write the XEP and some experimental implementation. I got an answer in the meaning of „That sounds like a cool idea, though we need to finish the current project first“. So, I will probably find the time to write the proposal XEP some time in the future. But if anyone is interested in a way to configure something remotely (either a device or a software), please contact me, we may want to exchange some ideas. Thank you PS.: It seems the email didn't get through when sent from company email, so I'm retrying with a personal one (which is subscribed to the list). Please ignore any possible duplicates.
Re: [Standards] NetConf over XMPP
On 5/30/13 1:04 AM, Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote: > Hello > > I'm working with protocol called NetConf (RFC 6241) now. The protocol can be > used to configure devices remotely over something more standardized than web > interface or ssh & command line utilities (which is good for people but not > for > automated scripts). > > The protocol uses XML messages and defines several transport layers to work on > top of (SSH, TLS socket, …). It seems like a reasonable idea to define a > transport over XMPP, which has several advantages (like you don't need 1000 > ssh > sessions to configure 1000 devices on your client, there's single point where > we > could define who is allowed to do the configuration, etc). > > Also, it could be used to configure software as well (XMPP bots, for example), > with possibly better UI than the ad-hoc commands. > > I brought the idea with my boss today that I'd like to do write the XEP and > some > experimental implementation. I got an answer in the meaning of „That sounds > like > a cool idea, though we need to finish the current project first“. > > So, I will probably find the time to write the proposal XEP some time in the > future. But if anyone is interested in a way to configure something remotely > (either a device or a software), please contact me, we may want to exchange > some > ideas. This does sound interesting (I'm somewhat familiar with NetConf from my days at the IETF) and I'd at least be willing to review the spec. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
Re: [Standards] NetConf over XMPP
Hello On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:43:43AM +0200, Steffen Larsen wrote: > I am not into NetConf, but is it not RPC calls? > If so, you can probably use XEP-009: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0009.html Part of NetConf is RPC, but from fast look at this XEP, it's different RPC (the elements used are named differently, the parameters are not wrapped in , …). This is one example of the NetConf's RPC: http://example.com/schema/1.2/config";> Also, there's more to NetConf than just the RPCs, like notion of session or discovering what models (sets of configuration options) and features the other side supports. I believe it should be quite easy to map them onto XMPP (put the RPCs into , use disco for the models & such, a session would be from the first RPC to either explicit method or to ). But I think these still need to be described so different implementations have a chance of doing them the same way. With regards -- When a fly lands on the ceiling, does it do a half roll or a half loop? Michal 'vorner' Vaner signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [Standards] NetConf over XMPP
Hi Michal, I am not into NetConf, but is it not RPC calls? If so, you can probably use XEP-009: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0009.html -Cheers! /Steffen On May 30, 2013, at 9:04 AM, Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote: > Hello > > I'm working with protocol called NetConf (RFC 6241) now. The protocol can be > used to configure devices remotely over something more standardized than web > interface or ssh & command line utilities (which is good for people but not > for > automated scripts). > > The protocol uses XML messages and defines several transport layers to work on > top of (SSH, TLS socket, …). It seems like a reasonable idea to define a > transport over XMPP, which has several advantages (like you don't need 1000 > ssh > sessions to configure 1000 devices on your client, there's single point where > we > could define who is allowed to do the configuration, etc). > > Also, it could be used to configure software as well (XMPP bots, for example), > with possibly better UI than the ad-hoc commands. > > I brought the idea with my boss today that I'd like to do write the XEP and > some > experimental implementation. I got an answer in the meaning of „That sounds > like > a cool idea, though we need to finish the current project first“. > > So, I will probably find the time to write the proposal XEP some time in the > future. But if anyone is interested in a way to configure something remotely > (either a device or a software), please contact me, we may want to exchange > some > ideas. > > Thank you > > PS.: It seems the email didn't get through when sent from company email, so > I'm > retrying with a personal one (which is subscribed to the list). Please ignore > any possible duplicates. > > -- > BOFH Excuse #452: > Somebody ran the operating system through a spelling checker. > > Michal 'vorner' Vaner
