Subject: [Netconf] Fw: NETCONF replace operation

From: "Bert Wijnen \(IETF\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:12:37 +0100

I have learned from VACM two things:

- We should not over-engineer. We did that with VACM. Nodbody uses/wants it,
  It was mainly a theorethical exercise.
- Even though VACM can be configerd in a simple way (like just read and write acces),
  it is not being used in a simple way... mostly (I think) because we overengineered it and
  so it looks/feels compliated to do even the simple thing.

my 2 cents,
Bert
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Andy Bierman 
  To: Phil Shafer 
  Cc: NETCONF 
  Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 8:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [Netconf] NETCONF replace operation

  Phil Shafer wrote:
  > Andy Bierman writes:
  >> We should learn from VACM and move on.
  > 
  > IMHO we should learn this isn't a problem we will solve in the next
  > little while and our efforts will be better spent on other issues
  > where we can bear fruit that people will need and use.
  > 

  If NETCONF is going to be a real replacement/supplement to CLI
  then it needs at least some of the ACM features used in CLI.
  Some operators use Radius and TACACS+ for CLI access control.
  Some just use 2 types of passwords -- root user and everybody else.

  IMO, we should support these CLI access control modes in NETCONF standard.

  > Thanks,
  >  Phil

  Andy
  _______________________________________________
  Netconf mailing list
  [email-masked]
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Geen virus gevonden in het binnenkomende-bericht.
  Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com 
  Versie: 9.0.733 / Virusdatabase: 271.1.1/2697 - datum van uitgifte: 02/19/10 08:34:00