The Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP)
draft-ietf-simple-xcap-12
Yes
(Jon Peterson)
No Objection
(Cullen Jennings)
(Jari Arkko)
(Lars Eggert)
(Lisa Dusseault)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Mark Townsley)
(Ross Callon)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 12 and is now closed.
Jon Peterson Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Cullen Jennings Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2006-07-05)
Unknown
The following questions and comments were raised by Andy Bierman.
1) Is this intended only for use with SIP?
2) Is there any access control model for securing data?
(What is the security model?)
3) Is there a persistence model for data?
(IMO there are problems with trying to abstract a NE device
configuration as an XML document, and this is one of them)
4) The examples would be easier to read if the XML was pretty-printed.
5) In a general sense there is clearly overlap between NETCONF and XCAP.
I think NETCONF tries to be more content and transport independent,
and the RPC-based architecture is more suited to standard and vendor
"specialized RPC" extensions, which provide a more natural
programming paradigm than a model based on XML document manipulation.
I realize that this document is returning from the RFC queue after having been approved by the IESG and these questions may have been already debated and answered. Yet, it would be good if the editor would review and address them prior to publication.
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Lars Eggert Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Lisa Dusseault Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Mark Townsley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown