RE: STDCONF WG charter proposal

So Andy, if I understand it correctly, then this possible
charter says that it will deliver within max 6 months:

- agreed upon and specific requirements for standardized
  CONFIGURATION of networks and network devices
- an agreed upon plan for potential deliverables.

At the end of the 6 month period (or ealier if those above
deliverables get done faster), we decide if we want to 
re-charter the WG to continue on the plans presented.
  
Thanks for the initial step. I think it is a good one.

I think it might also be good if during those first 6
months, various people would try to sit together and start
experimenting with some real code to try and understand
better what the issues are. That probably can be a separate
effort, cause it is more of a "experiment/research" type effort.

Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Bierman [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: woensdag 18 september 2002 1:24
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; Randy Bush; Bert Wijnen
> Subject: STDCONF WG charter proposal
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I was asked by Randy Bush awhile back to write a charter proposal
> to continue discussion on the xmlconf list titled "where do 
> we go from here". The following rough draft is intended to do 
> just that.
> 
> I avoided many technology specifics, because I didn't
> want to presume specific directions or solutions.
> I am including the OPS-NM list because this
> proposal is not specific to XML in any way.
> 
> Andy
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Standard Configuration (STDCONF) Working Group Charter
> 
> There is a need for standardized configuration of networks
> and network devices, which meets the existing and emerging
> requirements of network operators and network equipment
> developers. 
> 
> The working group will adopt existing technological standards
> and/or define new specifications for the purpose of advancing the
> quality of standards based network configuration technology
> within the Internet community.  The working group will start
> with a clean slate, an is not required to build upon existing 
> technology or be constrained to use specific technology for any 
> reason.  Technology reuse is a goal, but not nearly as important
> as the deployment of interoperable, standards-based technology 
> which meets the needs of the Internet community.
> 
> Several efforts have been made over the last two years to
> determine the requirements of network operators. The working 
> group will consider the output of these efforts, and may
> conduct further investigations, to determine how to best
> meet the network configuration needs of the Internet community.
> This community is comprised of several different types of
> constituents, and the working group is not bound to create
> a single solution to meet the needs of everybody.  There
> may be a need to specify multiple coordinated technologies 
> to meet specific requirements of the entire community.
> 
> The working group will specify mechanisms for the configuration
> of multiple devices within a network, as well as the configuration
> of a single network device.  A management framework which 
> can support operations across multiple devices, and operations
> initiated by a management application, a human operator,
> or a managed device, will be developed.
> 
> The working group may choose to deploy these standards in a
> phased manner, by modularizing the problem space instead of
> addressing every detail at once.  For example, the specification
> of management protocol transport(s), protocol operations,
> and security mechanisms may be developed before a standard
> data definition language or standard data definitions for 
> specific protocol feature configuration are developed.
> 
> The working group will specify the deployment plan and describe
> the document deliverables within 6 months of being chartered.
> The phased delivery of specifications will take between 12 and
> 24 additional months to complete.
>