Re: [Lime-oam-model] Status

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Mon, 09 March 2015 09:08 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: lime-oam-model@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lime-oam-model@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F7271A874A for <lime-oam-model@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 02:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.222
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.222 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, CN_BODY_35=0.339, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_65=0.6, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 O4juHeHBQdWy for <lime-oam-model@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 02:08:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 256A71A873E for <lime-oam-model@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 02:08:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BQA55407; Mon, 09 Mar 2015 09:08:24 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.34) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:08:23 +0000
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.146]) by nkgeml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.34]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 17:08:18 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, "lime-oam-model@ietf.org" <lime-oam-model@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Status
Thread-Index: AdBUb+kI6Mtyq6LaR7++JmP639kyRADTm+SwACVgyuAAfGezIA==
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 09:08:18 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA846DF59E@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <CO1PR05MB4422C6491A3B7179F229574AE130@CO1PR05MB442.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA846DDFE9@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <CO1PR05MB4423E80AE097618FB4BED8CAE1C0@CO1PR05MB442.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CO1PR05MB4423E80AE097618FB4BED8CAE1C0@CO1PR05MB442.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.180]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lime-oam-model/ZYfuhGzGe3rr5ohxk0TnKixM-OU>
Cc: "Deepak Kumar \(dekumar\)" <dekumar@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Lime-oam-model] Status
X-BeenThere: lime-oam-model@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: LIME WG OAM Model Design Team <lime-oam-model.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lime-oam-model>, <mailto:lime-oam-model-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lime-oam-model/>
List-Post: <mailto:lime-oam-model@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lime-oam-model-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-oam-model>, <mailto:lime-oam-model-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 09:08:29 -0000

Hi, Ron:
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Ronald Bonica [mailto:rbonica@juniper.net] 
发送时间: 2015年3月7日 5:28
收件人: Qin Wu; lime-oam-model@ietf.org
抄送: Deepak Kumar (dekumar)
主题: RE: Status

Qin,

Thanks for this summary. Unless I hear otherwise, I will assume that this is the group's consensus.

[Qin]: It has been a few days and no-one has disagreed.

IMHO, the design team has three tasks standing between itself and completion:

- craft a slide deck documenting findings

[Qin]: I will write the first draft and we can discuss on this list.

- present that slide deck at IETF 92

[Qin]: I am happy to do this if no one has objection.

- produce an ID recording findings

[Qin]: I can also start this task. I think I can make a first draft before Dallas, but I am not allowed to post it until Monday morning of IETF week in Dallas.

Is that OK?

Thanks.

Do we have volunteers for any of those tasks?

                                                                 Ron


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lime-oam-model [mailto:lime-oam-model-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Qin Wu
> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 10:38 PM
> To: Ronald Bonica; lime-oam-model@ietf.org
> Cc: Deepak Kumar (dekumar)
> Subject: Re: [Lime-oam-model] Status
> 
> Ron:
> If my understanding is correct, here is the status of group discussion.
> Based on first design team discussion ,people agreed to sort out 
> common OAM requirements first, Greg provides OAM (Data) Model Analysis 
> table from his perspective which compares IP OAM, IP/MPLS OAM, MPLS-TP 
> OAM, TRILL OAM from several criteria and lists several common 
> requirements.
> 
> Based on OAM Model Analysis, common elements used for OAM model are 
> agreed, e.g., testing point, connection oriented vs 
> connectionless,loss of continuity defect,fault domain,technology type, 
> addressing, ECMP, common OAM functions(e.g., cc,cv, path discovery, performance measurement).
> 
> CFM like model as management plane model is orthogonal to data plane 
> OAM protocol and meet all these requirements.
> Also MP terminologies are widely used in the most of OAM technologies, 
> it is not a good idea to define new terminologies to represent common 
> elements for the OAM model.
> 
> Therefore my understanding is that the choice of an OAM model seems to 
> have no impact on the LIME work.
> LIME model focuses on common part of various OAM technologies, 
> therefore LIME's work can be made "model agnostic".
> 
> Regards!
> -Qin
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Lime-oam-model [mailto:lime-oam-model-bounces@ietf.org] 代表
> Ronald Bonica
> 发送时间: 2015年3月2日 6:40
> 收件人: lime-oam-model@ietf.org
> 主题: [Lime-oam-model] Status
> 
> Folks,
> 
> Since the group's formation, we have lost two members (Nobo and Tissa).
> Santosh PK will replace Nobo.
> 
> Could Qin or Greg summarize that group's status for Santosh?
> 
> Also, Qin and Greg, do you think that the design team will have 
> anything to report at IETF 92?
> 
>                                                 Ron Bonica
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lime-oam-model mailing list
> Lime-oam-model@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-oam-model
> _______________________________________________
> Lime-oam-model mailing list
> Lime-oam-model@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-oam-model