[Nemops-interest] Re: [Nemops-workshop-attendees] NEMOPS Workshop Report

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Dhruv, Wes,

I have been reviewing 
https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html, 
the March 6th version
Pretty good report. While reading the report,, I refreshed my mind by 
reviewing all the presentations, hence some references to the slides.

Here is some feedback.

- OLD: Define a reference approach/process for service exposure 
discovery and API discovery
- NEW: Define a reference approach/process for service exposure 
discovery (API discovery)
Source: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2024-nemopsws-02/materials/slides-interim-2024-nemopsws-02-sessa-5-rfc-3535-20-years-later-02

- If you mentioned presenter names, it might be best to mention the 
presenter name.
Just one mistake in that front.
OLD: [LARSSON 
<https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#LARSSON>] 
cautioned against making changes that could disrupt the ecosystem.
NEW: [FARRER] cautioned against ...

- On the following presentation:
[KELLER 
<https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#KELLER>] 
shared Deutsche Telekom’s perspective, emphasizing that while YANG 
models perform well for provisioning, they currently fall short in 
providing the operational stability required for validation. Achieving 
fully closed-loop automated and autonomous networking will require a 
greater focus on observability, particularly through advancements in 
streaming telemetry with the "on-change" feature [RFC9196 
<https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#RFC9196>].
I find the following observation about vendor YANG models very 
interesting, and worth mentioning IMO.

This relates to your later sentence "The implementation and support of 
multiple models (IETF, OpenConfig, and native) is an unavoidable reality 
in network management. " and to the 3.3.2 Discussion section.

- rfc3535bis presented by [CONTRERAS], you are missing some key 
requirements.
Background: as NMOP co-chairs, I specifically reviewing this report of 
light of I-D.boucadair-nmop-rfc3535-20years-later 
<https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#I-D.boucadair-nmop-rfc3535-20years-later>
If you look at 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2024-nemopsws-02/materials/slides-interim-2024-nemopsws-02-sessa-5-rfc-3535-20-years-later-02,the 
missing requirements are greyed out


The only reason why they were greyed out is that there were covered in 
other presentations. For completeness, I believe we should add those 
under [CONTRERAS]

- I specifically liked this paragraph

    _Some topics absent_ from the workshop discussions included tooling
    (what is currently missing) and strategies to support tool
    development (who pays, who develops, who maintains). The primary
    focus of the discussion was on YANG and NETCONF/RESTCONF, while
    several other network management protocols and techniques currently
    used received less attention during the workshop. The discussion on
    future directions prioritized improving existing solutions rather
    than introducing entirely new ones (such as enabling intelligence in
    network management). Some key recommendations made by operators
    during outreach (Section 2
    <https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#outreach>)
    are listed in Appendix B
    <https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#recommendations>.

I believe it deserves it own "Not Covered in the Workshop" section 
(maybe 3.4.6), because this is important but also because it leads to 
potential next brainstorming/actionable steps.
 From my own notes: "Tools and opensource reference implementations, of 
course (exactly like everybody wants free training or free beers) but 
who will pay for the development?"
This relates to Michael Richardson's message:

    Lots of talk about open source, but not really any mention of how such a
    thing could be funded.  That's really the problem.

Note: The last sentence (Some key recommendations made by operators 
during outreach (Section 2 
<https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#outreach>) 
are listed in Appendix B 
<https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#recommendations>.) 
seems to be misplaced. The paragraph starts with "not covered" and 
finishes with "recommendations made by operators"

- Appendix A. 
<https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#appendix-A>Insights 
from Operator Feedback 
<https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report.html#name-insights-from-operator-feed> 

[TODO: Check if this is useful in the RFC or should be removed]
=> Yes, this is useful and should be kept in the RFC, as it can serve a 
source of information (without analzying the survey again) for brainstorming

Nits:
- NetConf => NETCONF
- Alexander PELOV => Alexander Pelov
- section 3.1.1 Future Directions. Create 3 paragraphs, starting by 
[CLAISE], [WATSEN], [WILTON]

Regards, Benoit
On 2/20/2025 7:32 AM, Dhruv Dhody wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Wes and I have posted the initial version of the NEMOPS Workshop Report -
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report/
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report-01.html
>
> We’d appreciate your feedback, ideally on the [e-mail] 
> list or directly to the authors. You can also submit a PR on GitHub:
>
> https://github.com/intarchboard/draft-iab-nemops-workshop-report
>
> Reminder: The report summarizes the proceedingsof the workshop and 
> does not necessarily reflect the IAB’s views or positions.
>
> Thanks!
> Dhruv & Wes
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nemops-workshop-attendees mailing list [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email [e-mail]