Re: [Isis-wg] draft-amante-isis-reverse-metric-01

[Christopher LILJENSTOLPE <[e-mail]>]

Greetings Bruno,

On 08Dec2010, at 19.53, <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 
>>> [Warning: thinking out loud...]
>>> 
>>> a) I understand the need to cost out a link with a single CLI on a
>>> single router.
>>> b) I hear that some would prefer management action be done with
>>> management protocols rather than routing protocols extensions.
>>> 
>>> So what about doing (a) with management protocols? i.e. a router A
>>> providing a single CLI and triggering the remote action on router B
>>> using management protocols.
>>> That would also serve as a test to see by ourselves if this is
>>> convenient or if those management protocols need enhancement. It
> could
>>> also be reused as an example for NMS to do it by themselves next
> (next?)
>>> time.
>>> 
>> 
>> Nice in theory.  What mgmt protocol will
>> A) figure out the peer router
>> B) figure out the peer link on said peer router
>> C) temporarily cost out that link
>> D) in a multiple-vendor network?
> 
> So if it's difficult / impossible, may be NMS or SP network management
> systems are not the one to blame, actually. May be current IETF
> management tools / framework need to be extended.
> 

And we've attempted that, Bruno, for those last 20 years.  When/if we obtain that grail, we will all be grateful, however, I've given up holding my breath for that.....

	Chris

> Regards,
> Bruno
> 

---
李柯睿
Check my PGP key here:
https://www.asgaard.org/~cdl/cdl.asc