Re: [lmap] LMAP - what next?

Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com> Thu, 18 May 2017 20:43 UTC

Return-Path: <dromasca@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81B6A129C07 for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 May 2017 13:43:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 xeAEc2WHX5ar for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 May 2017 13:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x231.google.com (mail-qt0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::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 9AA7312EB07 for <lmap@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 May 2017 13:36:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x231.google.com with SMTP id c13so44107028qtc.1 for <lmap@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 May 2017 13:36:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=f4GXhqjb9GSbz+jMT/YjcR2d4ntWsZjCLHo1OS0ClMg=; b=NmSWSp+4Ts6MfknqmAfwvN/WegUw+hKWxkwMX5FS3NLNFhdbotcJKfbbKiq/joUrak Fbpd2DA5UXVX36imQkJTslh4b1tkwzvTZwheUufNIGXkTfx6s46yFh/ivCzBUpnz1hb1 qe/N9wqD+y5+8whPUsRkGkjikQRbaOTaAyN/8GTU3QZZMjHl3Dw4c5T9AadePny5Phc8 9d4FWV6xiYoB31JheSjQ1u7H6Khhskwz8nBf6iQaEKeZ/cKjA4hheqgMuaWeeZ4fg7xB SXlINDUWXg0wwnP0D+YY5di0Np1QXqaaWTmHEGAH1ce2MtspPILYrjdRqPmwDl6z66yL i4mQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=f4GXhqjb9GSbz+jMT/YjcR2d4ntWsZjCLHo1OS0ClMg=; b=QayN9EcX5O+BCU5IpzGd4mL7BIO1n7OTiFJPzlQYIcf5r5u7ojI6utM2ehn0BSOECQ 42FFODzQToJeAj2kZWAD/sIp4gEdrbppcpy6soOUEpU5obhV467wD6+wVven5/RJGyaB s0kMQ/EQu/0dhSeitEx+bGQNLhXfhDtKfAxXYwN+6oJsPE5r659i6rGfcaeQ5pw5bPB0 zRBdC7IZtQANPwAwptc8kZhF9Ly6hsayVKvRn5BL0iXOOG8NNRf4zKp8ryKylfQbjNFo ik7brLqbofe9yccMu27kb+WH67mqujgKmsnOBbvXwUG/taPtRIQXhJ3O6pDKSh+U1WXs GLhQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDe2WV2DlM3FzVhi2Fsbjuk5CSdfbdt2eXPMHkz0KNE4zE1ky/Y FGBmQvlWZcmsLZY0WQjpma+hosxUqia7
X-Received: by 10.200.4.162 with SMTP id s34mr6208254qtg.35.1495139768240; Thu, 18 May 2017 13:36:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.31.101 with HTTP; Thu, 18 May 2017 13:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAFgnS4UAvR=9f0zNiSbp5Y23hbULFxCVRn6WNyA5_vMBFU2-xg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFgnS4UAvR=9f0zNiSbp5Y23hbULFxCVRn6WNyA5_vMBFU2-xg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 23:36:07 +0300
Message-ID: <CAFgnS4UE+Vh+2_4DxnQsO6y9T-WPUb47VM9-bgpUa6KOe9YUMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: lmap@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f4030435cc58c69244054fd25ab3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lmap/24KubQlsnN8C6AX71ou_nOOyqyc>
Subject: Re: [lmap] LMAP - what next?
X-BeenThere: lmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Large Scale Measurement of Access network Performance <lmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lmap/>
List-Post: <mailto:lmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 20:43:22 -0000

Hi,

There was no answer to the list to this mail. The chairs had some off-line
discussions with Juergen (as editor of the LMAP documents) and with Benoit
who is back to be our shepherding AD. Our assessment is that  it would be
good to complete the current charter by bringing to completion and
publishing draft-ietf-lmap-restconf. While RESTCONF has been published, the
progress on the client and server configuration models has been slow and we
believe that the RESTCONF LMAP document would ideally describe how to put
the pieces together, e.g., how to configure an LMAP agent to do call home
to the LMAP
controller and to run regular RESTCONF sessions to POST results to a
collector. This is related to the RESTCONF configuration models work going
on in the NETCONF WG which has its own pace of progress.

Our proposal is as follows:

- Resuscitate draft-ietf-lmap-restconf and sync it with the work going on
in NETCONF. Juergen will put it higher in his TODO list
- unless some spectacular proposal for new work shows up we shall work on
the mail list and we will not meet at IETF 99
- unless some spectacular proposal for new work shows up we shall go
dormant or even close the WG after completing the restconf document.

Comments?

Regrds,

Dan


On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>; wrote:

> Hi,
>
> With the LMAP WG having shipped the IM and DM documents to the RFC Editor,
> it's time to discuss what next.
>
> Specifically, I have two questions:
>
> - what to do with draft-ietf-lmap-restconf?
> - is there any new work for lmap on short term, or should we rather focus
> on implementations and revisit the issue in a year or two?
>
> Comments and discussions are welcome.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>
>