Questions regarding the draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization
Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Tue, 09 April 2019 13:33 UTC
Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 316151207F6; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 06:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 HmKCp3zJ4JT5; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 06:33:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x231.google.com (mail-lj1-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 DD7AA120803; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 06:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id k8so14454848lja.8; Tue, 09 Apr 2019 06:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=+b2uw47CruMTYvxjxtoBci4Reg0V+yKzSmgfokyfw+0=; b=Q2NW5Ovx87JtloqUrf9czR9dt05p5Uj/0t2el/k6FXgY0P5VK6Bp/jgvJna/an56tk hjv9adPHoPtsrbnhyVgbB1mRqq1vRyLr1nBzDGNnNwzktAY0sA3oSaSi3wwh5xuirdIw cQ3B0NYDemZQS1mBloL6W5VQVbMz5XaUSHZt4RCro1jf7YDFnxu+jFQ4BSum1ZyT9c8i BXlcsavL13wXM/68+2BdUY4lJA52aPALEYezTPXonyC4vVoOxfmaCAjK/lI0v2G/XIV2 Daxa70jkJKjM7RCsvCDIphrF6Uom7vFlANbjO1M27oQNbknEfV7IaUhxg6f2hbHfEUxL wNUQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=+b2uw47CruMTYvxjxtoBci4Reg0V+yKzSmgfokyfw+0=; b=eFPno4ZFE6X4rKEdeken4PKVyRawziYQARO491iQsjv+JlmLLbe5EdFPzvEPegr+XT itexPP9MIm7762+6H2r/jarYPVewDIGsBjAFJUzsxfOMmpM3jn7VCv/25jqY/I7vgzHU 4m5hKsCLbZnNZzup1sS8IuCOs3LSGf3NXI48cxUty9Fh3gML1SdAPES9TiEal3Ds3ZXm WG+MO4ldc4mh5P8zE3Pit4lNgRqsX8a+kcmR8LAuzrtO2KuDBTRPrjrqjhddTONZn/rh bT6TRSyg0DdKTN5WhflExzqMjaXWIbC63ofsuA5x4Up9f7xj2cE4Iy0Zl48HYLVFDzwP gLdQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWjeVK/JibO5Ok49HkCn+KE6iQsgmkXLVHrLRdWKyiiZJGNgfMf NyU59PgWZZWAz+vFvvlRyIC09t0ZfeUHd0UmWAjamivZi8c=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqycp4o54KK3BgS0jtdrDM0ReE35QSSfovO2X1sWzjrQo7U8emcLuayOy3P02L94ZUCB9orOqHIE430MHakrt1s=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8794:: with SMTP id n20mr2020324lji.76.1554816789739; Tue, 09 Apr 2019 06:33:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2019 15:32:58 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXi2RNY=yd1A5J6_XuR-DBXYagOvPPV4=PkEnJsAXXcig@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Questions regarding the draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization
To: draft-wu-model-driven-management-virtualization@ietf.org, RTGWG <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000717fe9058618fefd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/w9kvbH-Wv-n7MqUJBJU5aiKyQwg>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2019 13:33:17 -0000
Dear Authors, I have some questions related to OAM aspect of service and network management automation and much appreciate your consideration: - I couldn't find Networking Working Group to which the draft seems to be attributed. In your opinion, in which of IETF WGs you see this work to be the most relevant? - I couldn't find any reference to the process of Sevice Activation Testing (SAT) in the document. Are you planning to cover it later or see the absence of any SAT work at IETF as an obstacle to completing the closed-loop lifecycle for a service? - Figure in Section 3 "Network Service and Resource Models" refers to OAM and PM separately. Do you see PM not being part of overall OAM toolset? - in Section 3.1.2 in regard to LIME models, you've stated: "These three models can be used to provide consistent reporting, configuration and representation." Do you have evidence in support of this statement? - Figure 2 lists BFD, LSP Ping, and MPLS-TP models under OAM. In your opinion, are these three models sufficient to perform 'F' and 'P' of FCAPS network management, i.e., Fault Management and Performance Monitoring, adequately? (Should note that LSP Ping and MPLS-TP YANG models are only individual drafts); Regards, Greg
- Questions regarding the draft-wu-model-driven-man… Greg Mirsky
- RE: Questions regarding the draft-wu-model-driven… Qin Wu
- RE: Questions regarding the draft-wu-model-driven… mohamed.boucadair
- Re: Questions regarding the draft-wu-model-driven… Greg Mirsky
- RE: Questions regarding the draft-wu-model-driven… mohamed.boucadair