Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management

[Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]>]

On 3/2/05 3:02 AM, "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> 
>> I hope to see folks weighing on the debate of xcon vs. xcap
>> since a draft
>> was just submitted on that issue. Lisa D has tried to start
>> discussions on
>> this before and not many people have helped provide input on what IETF
>> should do.
>> 
>> The comparison of XCON to NETCONF or WebDAV leaves me totally
>> confused. XCON
>> is about conferencing.
>> 
> 
> I apologize for not being clear, but that was just one bullet trying to say
> too much. By looking at the requirements described
> http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xcon-cpcp-reqs-04
> .txt I cannot help wondering if inventing a new protocol is really necessary.

No problem - yes I think there are some good points, with this draft in
particular xcon may move to discarding cpcp all together. Still unclear but
discussions are starting and could use the help of a network management
perspective and experience.

> I know discussions are happening, and I believe they are a good start, but
> maybe we need to go further. At the end of the day operators will need to
> manage IP networks, running SIP,  and conferencing, and many other. Do we need
> to invent a different protocol for configuration of each one of the layers and
> applications? 

Do we need to invent a different protocol - probably not depending on what
you define as the scope. But if we asked the questions slightly different,
do we need to invent something other than SNMP, well I think the current
deployment results more or less speak for themselves. I don't know why
people choose not to do SNMP, but it seems like something worth figuring out
and addressing. 


Cullen