RE: Use Cases of Network Operation of LAP

At 03:51 PM 12/31/2002 +0100, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>OPS-NM members....
>
>I have not see any comment/question or discussion on the below!
>
>What does that mean:
> - we have not had time to read this?
> - nobody is interested?
> - silence means we agree that this is a good document and
>   that it represents real scenarios as we see with Large
>   Access Providers.
> - we're tired and we are not interested in reading?
>
>Pls answer/comment if at all possible.

I think this draft can be useful to vendors to assess the needs
of large access providers.  There are a couple concerns I have
though:

1) NM applications vs. device information
The draft does not make much distinction between NMS and device
requirements.  This is important because the IETF does not
standardize NMS applications in any way.  In many places,
the desired device attributes listed are fairly clear, but
in some places this is not the case. The draft does not
specify a data model, such as MIBs.  It may be useful
to determine if a standard MIB object exists which corresponds
to each device attribute, in order to reduce semantic ambiguity and
provide a checklist related to commonly used monitoring technology.

2) Informational vs. BCP
The authors are requesting RFC publication as an Informational RFC,
which I support.  I do not think a BCP is appropriate unless
there is considerable input and agreement from other access providers
about the content of this draft.


>Thanks,
>Bert 

Andy



>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chen, Weijing [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: dinsdag 26 november 2002 22:46
>> To: '[email protected]'; Randy Bush
>> Cc: '[email protected]'
>> Subject: Use Cases of Network Operation of LAP
>> 
>> 
>> Bert, Randy, and all,
>> 
>> We have just submitted the 01.txt of "Use Cases of Network 
>> Operation of
>> Large Access Providers".  URL is
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-weijing-lap-ops-use-01.txt. 
>> 
>> We thus formerly request the reviews and comments from all 
>> the participants
>> of OPS area.  After constructive discussion and modification, we would
>> further request this draft to be advanced to Informational 
>> RFC, either as
>> individual or WG one.  Thank you for your support.
>> 
>> Abstract: 
>> This draft discusses the typical network operation use cases 
>> of Large Access
>> Providers (LAP).  Since a LAP has hundreds of locations, 
>> thousands of nodes,
>> millions of subscribers, where the law of large number 
>> affects the bottom
>> line of network operation, a LAP has been always strives to streamline
>> network operation functions.  The use cases presented in this 
>> document are
>> generic with respect to the type of network technology and 
>> can be augmented
>> with technology-specific details.  They are intended to be 
>> the baseline for
>> other network operation streamlining requirements.
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Weijing Chen
>> SBC Technology Resources
>> 9505 Arboretum Blvd.
>> Austin, TX 78759
>> 512 372 5710
>> [email protected]
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>