Jason Zurawski wrote:
Hi Roman;
Thanks for providing this, pretty neat. Also for reference the NETCONF RFC is here:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4741
I'm sending you some info about the investigation work (by Arne Oslebo) on Netconf in pS which is being done in Geant3. After a while I will add a detailed description from one of project documents but it's still under review process so it must wait a bit.
An obvious issue that the author has pointed out to not use NM-WG/NMC-WG is the lack of documentation both at a protocol and service level, which is a failing for the pS consortium in general. Hopefully this will be rectified soon through this group.
To comment on the subject matter itself, I am having a hard time justifying in my mind why trying to use a protocol designed for a similar (but not identical) task is a good idea. In NETCONF's own words it:
provides mechanisms to install, manipulate, and delete the configuration of network devices
This touches a gray area in perfSONAR that has been the topic of DICE meetings in the past, namely managing the service configuration vs the measurement configuration. I think there may be a place in perfSONAR for this protocol, but I don't believe that exchanging/storing the actual data with the NETCONF primitives makes sense.
Data exchange was my concern as well but I was told that NETCONF deals with it without problems . Soon I will have more information and give you an access to the demo. Roman
I will end by noting a reply that Martin has been known to give in the past: "its all just XML!". Maybe we can see a demonstration at the next developers meeting to see how valuable this could be.
Thanks;
-jason