Re: [CCAMP] YANG Alarm Module in CCAMP?

stefan vallin <stefan@wallan.se> Tue, 09 May 2017 10:14 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan@wallan.se>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79FF5129BA8 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 May 2017 03:14:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wallan-se.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dct-qkqW410M for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 May 2017 03:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-x231.google.com (mail-wr0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 184B5129BC6 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 May 2017 03:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-x231.google.com with SMTP id z52so65852272wrc.2 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 May 2017 03:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wallan-se.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=xeqwgJU6mVD+MGdespxbHu0/q+V1yKklKf5ckoyFBqM=; b=WzPnP7yfQO6QMoYgbeR3EYiEIDo/PcAJ5SdubFBoZ4VNnYbJEphwX2kPdHfoVM1nyF dHSeLp6BDOXEI/MrUxjE563X2uiFc4Om7tAICt6yr1dAdoBSiQhDkXP7xqEfiLAbK4h8 BNLVh2CkQetw5SFgEzk6WNeY3ezNbp9Rotshgm4vU8ZyI688U5XNuP/6i9G3FzqVxvIr eu0jEorwmchsJUFylWxZw2EeK0QmHeqEayNU1BCazb9gkoPG6lWREWYmmBY2DJbqYEr5 w1G66lsn4dJ/fD2rJey8i+yc9l55ufdOYwXPvElwDVNsnjIU3ojTaP3iKCx+BLdhw2cn CiFg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=xeqwgJU6mVD+MGdespxbHu0/q+V1yKklKf5ckoyFBqM=; b=PMwqvUua4IoVIDTtGMzpGuOyM4rXQmWBpIp/+nQPSDQB3W56J/A9lTHURGs5L6+Fb/ SKdKxJ96hQpu8znLI6hlR7lfXru0Rie/xflPHicgxoi+PPu2s4WtWhGdNw6OyR/lK651 gPmRJFvxp+TJ0jJCQXVxH88yLYTK8DxfFMXI9NdPhroxCGZAUqwAdWTv8sWwfmg4musg uWRuWZoudUjLAaa2dg0oqF1Yo+0A/HrpiX8cFcKGMCctyZ4tGW7FRtcPmBoQZLG4upAn PJab56+vUXzOCPLG90MfecPho0exZRRSyjC/M55jgYzhakYRZE62VeepQzjyQexDQMU/ jCsQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCB4ebzowzc1fjszB7POLGOJy8tFayjsZ6Ar8TNko90L0NHcQDV rY/Dz+994OIkcJSPLiM=
X-Received: by 10.25.195.150 with SMTP id t144mr10591273lff.23.1494324891797; Tue, 09 May 2017 03:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.250.251.134] (h87-96-139-222.cust.se.alltele.net. [87.96.139.222]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g11sm2037302lji.35.2017.05.09.03.14.45 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 09 May 2017 03:14:50 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FD2B1182-C842-4B89-8F3D-EA2C382B051C"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: stefan vallin <stefan@wallan.se>
In-Reply-To: <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF8AB50E23E@DGGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 12:14:44 +0200
Cc: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>, "netmod-chairs@ietf.org" <netmod-chairs@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <55A58B0B-281F-40CD-81E9-0F074CA61E95@wallan.se>
References: <20170508.100942.1723888645272889243.mbj@tail-f.com> <AM2PR07MB09946D8FC13130E568BDEB95F0EE0@AM2PR07MB0994.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <VI1PR07MB1005AD5334CFBE2C0009B420F0EF0@VI1PR07MB1005.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF8AB50E23E@DGGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com>
To: Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/R1Qzn-qLP8nML9cSsWTb9tgeb6c>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] YANG Alarm Module in CCAMP?
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 10:14:59 -0000

Hi All!
Thanks for reading the doc.
A couple of comments:
1) I personally agree it fits in NETMOD, but the discussion in NETMOD said we would get much more relevant input in CCAMP since there is more alarm expertise in this group. So this is circular :)
2) I do not really agree when you say "extend it with technological aspect”, “optical alarm Yang should be in the scope of CCAMP” requires a dedicated CCAMP YANG module. The tech specific alarms are “alarm types” according to the alarm-module. Those are defined as YANG identities. So the tech specific part is “only” defining the corresponding identity. No real model here, just the identities. We will have a problem if different technologies will define different alarm-modules.
3) To Petch point on "I am conscious of how much time I spent on Sharon's SMI versions, which I did not then see in the wild”.
Same here :) I took part of a couple of implementations as well.
And that is one of the main reasons why I think an Alarm YANG is critical. Why do we not see the IETF Alarm MIB in the wild?
* It came too late, all devices had proprietary ways of reporting alarms (if devices had a notion of alarms at all….). Lets do an Alarm YANG now to avoid that problem.
* Since it had to add on top of existing MIBs it became a complex alarm mapping MIB (Mapping existing notfs into an alarm model) rather than an alarm MIB. That made it very complex.

Here is a presentation



Stefan Vallin
stefan@wallan.se
+46705233262

> On 09 May 2017, at 11:51, Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Daniele and all,
> 
> Yes, I agree with you.
> 
> As I said to Lou in another thread, I think the generic alarm Yang could be defined in either Netmod or Teas, but the technology specific such as optical alarm Yang should be in the scope of CCAMP. 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Fatai
> 
> 
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Daniele Ceccarelli
> 发送时间: 2017年5月9日 17:34
> 收件人: Daniele Ceccarelli; Martin Bjorklund; ccamp@ietf.org
> 抄送: netmod-chairs@ietf.org; stefan@wallan.se
> 主题: Re: [CCAMP] YANG Alarm Module in CCAMP?
> 
> Hi authors, NETMOD chairs, CCAMP WG,
> 
> i went through the document and, despite believing it's a super well written and understandable document, I don't think it fits in CCAMP. 
> This is a more generic work with a scope broader than CCAMP. At a first thought I would say TEAS, but also TEAS is not the right place since it's not related to traffic engineering. 
> The day you plan to extend it with technological aspect, then CCAMP would be its natural home.
> 
> Fatai, do you agree with the analysis?
> 
> BR
> Daniele  
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Daniele Ceccarelli
> Sent: lunedì 8 maggio 2017 16:40
> To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>; ccamp@ietf.org
> Cc: stefan@wallan.se
> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] YANG Alarm Module in CCAMP?
> 
> Hi Martin, Stefan,
> 
> thanks a lot for sharing the draft. I'll read it and let you know my personal opinion ASAP.
> 
> Working group, could you please do the same and share your thoughts?
> 
> Thanks
> Daniele  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Bjorklund
> Sent: lunedì 8 maggio 2017 10:10
> To: ccamp@ietf.org
> Cc: stefan@wallan.se
> Subject: [CCAMP] YANG Alarm Module in CCAMP?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We have been working an a generic YANG module for alarm management for a while (draft-vallin-netmod-alarm-module).  The model is based on experience from several alarm management system over the years.  It has been presented in NETMOD (reflected in the draft name), but the NETMOD chairs felt that maybe CCAMP would be a better home for this draft.
> 
> So our question is if CCAMP would be interested in working on this draft?
> 
> The latest version is available as:
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-vallin-netmod-alarm-module-02.txt
> 
>  Abstract:
>    This document defines a YANG module for alarm management.  It
>    includes functions for alarm list management, alarm shelving and
>    notifications to inform management systems.  There are also RPCs to
>    manage the operator state of an alarm and administrative alarm
>    procedures.  The module carefully maps to relevant alarm standards.
> 
> 
> /martin & stefan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp