Hello,
Indeed a very important change from Centralized to Coordinated.
I remember discussions at IETF94/Yokohama about possible solutions to
the ASM problem and the centralized approach was really preeminent and
thus putting out of scope potential solutions more distributed (à la ANIMA).
Also, ASM is one of the problems that might benefit from a "coordinated"
management approach.
We could think about generalizing the scheme to shared resources /
resource pool management (instead of only addresses / address ranges as
the resource).
Best regards, Laurent.
On 21/03/2017 15:12, Michael Richardson wrote:
Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
k> I've been tracking this a bit. Their main focus is on a YANG interface
k> between the NOC and the IPAM system. It's thanks to me that the C
k> stands for Coordinated instead of Centralized.
Cool.
k> I believe that our prefix management use case is part of the back end
k> for this rather than competition, but we should definitely track the
k> work.
I agree: it complementary. I guess I think of ANIMA as being the front
end that talks to the IPAM in the back-end :-)
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
--
Laurent Ciavaglia
Nokia, Bell Labs
+33 160 402 636
route de Villejust - Nozay, France
linkedin.com/in/laurent.ciavaglia
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
