RE: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it

"Nelson, David" <> Tue, 13 September 2005 19:33 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFGX4-00051y-Er; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 15:33:30 -0400
Received: from ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFD1Q-0002RH-0O; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:48:36 -0400
Received: from (ietf-mx []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28162; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:48:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ([] ident=firewall-user) by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EFD5a-0005aW-9D; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:53:00 -0400
Received: from ([]) by (0.25.1/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j8DFmGZC000039; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:48:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ([]) by with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:48:17 -0400
Received: from source ([]) by host ([]) with SMTP; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:48:17 -0400
Received: from maandmbx2 ([]) by with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:46:54 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:46:54 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it
Thread-Index: AcW4cd1AkRSjA+ZuTuamDzLi0KTnPAAB0GwA
From: "Nelson, David" <>
To: <>, "IETF Discussion" <>, <>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Sep 2005 15:46:54.0773 (UTC) FILETIME=[5DB71E50:01C5B87A]
X-pstn-version: pmps:sps_win32_1_1_0c1 pase:2.8
X-pstn-levels: (C:79.5348 M:97.0282 P:95.9108 R:95.9108 S:57.4322 )
X-pstn-settings: 4 (0.2500:0.7500) p:13 m:13 C:14 r:13
X-pstn-addresses: from <> forward (org good)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>

Juergen Quittek writes...

> It [call home] looks like a good topic for a BoF session in the 
> OaM area.
> There we could find out the relevance of the problem and discuss
> requirements for potential solutions.  Also there we can identify
> which working group would be the right one to deal with the issue.
> But until then, I propose that we let the ISMS group work on solving
> its original problem.

I agree that specifying Call Home functionality in SNMP should be out of
scope for ISMS, which is attempting to solve a different, well-defined

I also agree with Dave Harrington's suggestion that the SSH transport
mechanism for ISMS should be designed such that the initiation and
termination of SSH sessions, and the use of such sessions by the command
generator and command responder, would not preclude another WG from
specifying Call Home functionality using the ISMS work, unless that
requirement overly complicated the ISMS design work.  I would call this
division of labor an appropriate "separation of concerns". 

Ietf mailing list