[Anima] RTGWG-chairs: slot for RTGWG@109 to present on GRASP ? (was: Re: draft-li-rtgwg-protocol-assisted-protocol (was: Re: IETF 105 mic comments on draft-li-rtgwg-protocol-assisted-protocol))

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Tue, 10 November 2020 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6EC3A0AB7; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:57:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.869
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 23IGgCeKoe2o; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:57:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86BAD3A0ABC; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:57:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7228654868D; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 17:57:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 6CFF5440059; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 17:57:24 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 17:57:24 +0100
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>, Chenshuanglong <chenshuanglong@huawei.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "anima-chairs@ietf.org" <anima-chairs@ietf.org>, Lizhenbin <lizhenbin@huawei.com>, "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>, Guyunan <guyunan@huawei.com>, rwilton@cisco.com
Cc: rtgwg@ietf.org, rwilton@cisco.com
Message-ID: <20201110165724.GA42082@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/AoXtHuFMjSlEwfMxYfQGwNVp7uU>
Subject: [Anima] RTGWG-chairs: slot for RTGWG@109 to present on GRASP ? (was: Re: draft-li-rtgwg-protocol-assisted-protocol (was: Re: IETF 105 mic comments on draft-li-rtgwg-protocol-assisted-protocol))
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:57:34 -0000

In followup to the discuss on  draft-li-rtgwg-protocol-assisted-protocol:

Checking RTGWG agenda, it seems you might still have time available,
so if you are interested, i would be happy to whip up a few slides
to five an overview of GRASP and how we imagine it to be useable
to automate operational workflows for various services, including
routing protocols.


In-Reply-To: <20201110165235.GA17445@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 05:52:35PM +0100, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> I see subject draft is again on the agenda of RTGWG'109 and the authors also asked
> for a slot to present to ANIMA (which we would be happy to have, time permitting). 
> Some thoughts as contributor, maybe ANIMA chair:
> Reading the draft it looks like a reinvention of the ANIMA GRASP protocol
> that we finished almost 3 years ago, but without many of the mechanisms
> that make GRASP a well reuseable, easily extensible protocol. So i wonder
> why we would want to also do another more imited protocol for the same
> goals.
> On the mike RTGWG @IETF105, interest was raised to see a more comprehensive
> signalling enxchange example. Version 03 of the document seems to have
> expanded the BGP example a bit, but still not comprehensive enough for me
> to understand if/how this approach would ultimately work.
> I would like to encourage the authors to concentrate on fully specifying
> intended use-cases - ideally by simply specifying the use-case as
> solution using GRASP (we call this GRASP objectives). I am sure
> ANIMA participants (including me) would be happy to help explaining how
> to specify such a protocol on top of GRASP once we understand the use-case.
> Cheers
>     Toerless
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:02:31AM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> > To repeat my comments from the microphone regarding this draft:
> > 
> > We already have per-protocol operational and configuration state via the
> > IETF yang models for a given protocol.
> > 
> > We also have mechanisms to fetch operational state for such protocols; e.g.
> > netconf and restconf.
> > 
> > Rather than inventing a new mechanism to do troubleshooting for a protocol,
> > I'd suggest it makes better sense to augment existing IETF yang models to
> > include RPCs for interacting with troubleshooting for that protocol.
> > 
> > -- Jeff
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > rtgwg mailing list
> > rtgwg@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
> -- 
> ---
> tte@cs.fau.de