I am confused by 'netconf server (Manager) and a networking device
(netconf client = Analyzer)'. This is not how NETCONF usually works: A
device runs a NETCONF server and a management application a NETCONF
client.
Anyway, the way things work with NETCONF and YANG is that you define a
YANG data model that is understood by both the NETCONF server and the
NETCONF client.
I admit that I do not know much about your specific use case but if
you make statements that sound like YANG models have to proprietary
and hence IDPEF has an advantage because it is standardized, then you
need to be able to defend that.
/js
On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 08:18:54PM +0200, B.-C. Boesch wrote:
Hi Jürgen,
netconf will be used between a netconf server (Manager) and a networking
device (netconf client = Analyzer). IDPEF standardize the exchanged
content so that no additional information is needed at the Manager to
interpret the exchanged data. With IDPEF it is not relevant which
vendors of Analyzers and Manager are combined. How could the Manager
interpret the configuration data of the Analyzer without any additional
information (e.g. MIB) in the YANG environment? How could I change
options (e.g. thresholds) of an IDS signature of any IDS vendor with
YANG without additional information on the netconf server?
kind regards
Björn-C.
Am 02.05.2015 um 19:35 schrieb Juergen Schoenwaelder:
On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 02:32:34PM +0200, B.-C. Boesch wrote:
[...] With YANG and netconf the
configuration will be still vendor-specific and vendor-specific
adjustments are still needed on site of the central Manager.
This argument likely needs an explanation. There are people working
quite hard towards standardized YANG models.
/js
_______________________________________________
saag mailing list
saag(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>