Re: [Time] Editor's proposed draft of TIME/LIME Problem Statement

Jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Sat, 06 September 2014 10:11 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: time@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: time@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A69981A004E for <time@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Sep 2014 03:11:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 9waIPKv8R7FU for <time@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Sep 2014 03:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x235.google.com (mail-la0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D96AC1A003A for <time@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Sep 2014 03:10:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f53.google.com with SMTP id q1so6642278lam.12 for <time@ietf.org>; Sat, 06 Sep 2014 03:10:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=YEorY6CKZ0KAWedODQaEvmaJT+eONvRVgxEhPbN3/xM=; b=FQ4kqirr5LmPDsm8iYqNjQVAdBM6sPB2leGgdohrhR1v/sOl+62xQS1216CIN2jUZR RM8WT9uDMFRjnLPvCMx71v1NjEGgXcts1s/5YrsuOlXkRuvArVkw84Ih4gqQxhksVMDV BpNmTvuIhVYJOxDyChFMCLZjexxqsKViwqHVs2YdnVM/KkgMsLKwxX/ujwx/iTgUERiU IUP9kCaQm+1hDckMUmvHAYc7nz4dQrEiVntHSSbnOwyR1OfSuZ/rOnujMqQUDRw6epVD 6CWI/sKloumRW64MPl8qpOoL7f5Ku01rGky3ESpnp6QaFnFyFLTTVvF/80+kixZdt+D/ Z4Cw==
X-Received: by 10.112.161.70 with SMTP id xq6mr12166415lbb.49.1409998258167; Sat, 06 Sep 2014 03:10:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:1bc8:101:f101:d21:a993:29a4:c25d? ([2001:1bc8:101:f101:d21:a993:29a4:c25d]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id my10sm1582562lbb.9.2014.09.06.03.10.56 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 06 Sep 2014 03:10:57 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5409DA04.2020200@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2014 13:10:54 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <461483BC-58E7-483D-8B81-FB15C015C4B7@gmail.com>
References: <5409DA04.2020200@gmail.com>
To: Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/time/QfB1PWVJXnWcV-I3hsmOQSfsqfI
Cc: "time@ietf.org" <time@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Time] Editor's proposed draft of TIME/LIME Problem Statement
X-BeenThere: time@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Transport Independent OAM in Multi-Layer network Entity \(TIME\) discussion list." <time.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/time>, <mailto:time-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/time/>
List-Post: <mailto:time@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:time-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/time>, <mailto:time-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2014 10:11:01 -0000

Tom,

I had a read on this document. Good stuff. I have one lame comment though. The preamble building the "background and justification" is just too verbose and tries to address to many cases. When we get to problem statement part and the architecture part it was hard to put everything together in my head. I admit I have not spent much time on this specific topic but still.. I would try to illustrate the background with one concrete use case example that people can easily relate to and then state "there are other out there..".

- Jouni


On Sep 5, 2014, at 6:43 PM, Tom Taylor wrote:

> Qin Wu drafted me as editor of the Problem Statement I-D.
> 
> There has been a lot of activity behind the scenes. When I  was brought into the picture, I was given a version -03 of draft-ww-opsawg-multi-layer-oam as a starting point. This built on the published -02 version but had a lot more text up front and in the future work section. It also dropped "Architecture" from the title, removing it as a focus.
> 
> My view was that the Problem Statement had to be tightly focussed precisely on that topic, and the future work section would become the core of a gap analysis document. This view was accepted. As a result, I have prepared an Editor's Proposal, draft-edprop-opsawg-multi-layer-oam-ps-00, which I plan to submit on Monday after some people have looked it over. It is much stripped down from the original text and has a lot of new text, but I hope it is not a shock to TIME/LIME participants. A key issue was extremely careful attention to terminology and nuances of meaning.
> 
> The concluding Problem Statement section is fairly brief, so I'll quote it here:
> 
> 5.  Problem Statement
> 
>   Operators have a need for a management subsystem satisfying the
>   objectives stated in Section 3.  The analysis presented above
>   indicates that the solution lies in the direction of a consolidated
>   management function that operates in the first instance on a
>   technology and layer independent view of network and service
>   performance.
> 
>   There is value in attempting to define an architecture for
>   consolidated management that may reasonably be argued to meet the
>   stated objectives.  If this attempt succeeds, it can be followed up
>   with a gap analysis, which in turn will define a further program of
>   standardization.
> 
>   At the detailed level, Section 4.3.1 and Section 4.3.2 deal with the
>   matter of abstraction and its relationship to the specification of
>   YANG modules.  This is work beyond the initial definition of
>   architecture and awaits justification and prioritization by the gap
>   analysis.  A similar consideration relates to the solution to the
>   ECMP problem.
> 
>   The remaining issue is the OAM interworking issue identified in
>   Section 4.3.3.  This is architectural in nature, and should be
>   addressed by the proposed work on architecture.
> 
> Tom Taylor		
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Time mailing list
> Time@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/time