Re: RFC3411 discussion versus OAM + P + Mgt discussion

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Harrington
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 6:24 PM
> To: 't.petch'; 'Jon Saperia'; 'Randy Presuhn'
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: [OPS-AREA] RFC3411 discussion versus OAM + P + Mgt discussion
> 
> Tom,
> 
> you're mixing two different issues. Sure they intersect, but 
> they are different problems.
> 
> This discussion started as a suggestion that RFC3411 "An 
> architecture for Describing SNMP Frameworks" be suppplemented 
> with a simpler architecture document so doing work on SNMP 
> specifications stopped being so onerous. The ISMS work was 
> tremendously difficult because we were required by charter to 
> abide by the RFC3411 architecture. (This whole issue could be 
> made easier of the area directors didn't insist on RFC3411 
> being THE architecture, rather than "AN" architecture, as it 
> was designed to be.)
> 
> As part of that suggestion, I also suggested updating the 
> SNMP applicability statetment, RFC3410, to reflect current 
> thinking of SNMP being applicable primarily for monitoring, 
> Netconf for config, syslog for logging, and ipfix for flow 
> monitoring. These are all "vertical"
> network management protocols that operate at layer 7, and 
> make information available from multiple layers of instrumentation. 
> 

This walks, sounds and looks like a new architecture but if you want to
call it something different I am fine. I think that we need it. I do not
see the resources volunteering to write it, but if there are interested
parties to work on this I am in full support. 

> 
> If you are really worried about the explosion in OAM, and 
> Y.1731 in particular, maybe you should do a presentation at 
> the OPSAREA meeting explaining how Y.1731 works, and why it 
> might be bad for the Internet.
> 
> dbh
> 


Indeed. We still have open slots on the agenda of the OPS-AREA open
meeting in Beijing, and we can accommodate such a presentation followed
by a discussion. 

Dan