Robin,

Pretty much same comment as Acee - I'm not clear as to why...
Protocol YANG models developed in the last years clearly provide much better 
and more scalable approach to what has been proposed in the draft, since we are 
talking is-is - look at notifications in draft-ietf-isis-yang-isis-cfg. How do 
you propose to corelate operational state to configuration?

gRPC provides high performance RPC framework  to streaming the telemetry data 
that is structured, easy to consume and extend. 

I'm not going to go into technical discussion, however would appreciate your 
response as to why NMP (please do not restate the points in the section 4 of 
the draft, they are quite incorrect) 

Thanks!

Cheers,
Jeff

On 7/3/18, 09:21, "Lsr on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" <lsr-boun...@ietf.org 
on behalf of acee=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

    Hi Robin, 
    I'm not arguing to deprecate BMP. What I am arguing is that the fact that 
BMP was created 15 years ago doesn't necessarily mean we should create an 
analogous IMP for IS-IS given the current IETF OPS technologies and the fact 
that faster link speeds and Moore's law facilitate deployment of these new OPS 
technologies. Anyway, I looked at the agenda and I will definitely attend GROW 
on Wednesday afternoon for the discussion. 
    Thanks,
    Acee 
    
    On 7/3/18, 6:40 AM, "Lizhenbin" <lizhen...@huawei.com> wrote:
    
        Hi Acee,
        Thank for your attention to the new draft. Please refer to my reply 
inline.
        
        Best Regards,
        Robin
        
        
        
        -----Original Message-----
        From: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem 
(acee)
        Sent: Monday, July 02, 2018 9:24 PM
        To: Guyunan (Yunan Gu, IP Technology Research Dept. NW) 
<guyu...@huawei.com>; g...@ietf.org; ops...@ietf.org
        Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [GROW] FW: New Version Notification for 
draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol-00.txt
        
        Hi Yunan, Shunwan, and Zhenbin, 
        
        What are the advantages of inventing a new protocol over just using 
YANG and NETCONF, RESTCONF, or gNMI? 
        [Robin] In the draft we simply mention the difference between NMP and 
protocols you mentioned for the management plane. Though there is maybe some 
overlap between the two types of protocols, the protocols you mentioned is not 
enough for monitoring the control protocol. For example, would we like to use 
YANG and NETCONF, RESTCONF, or gNMI to export the packets of control protocols 
such as update message of BGP and/or ISIS PDU, etc. for the purpose of 
monitoring?
        
        
        Operators and vendors are doing this anyway. A second alternative would 
be to listen passively in IS-IS (or OSPF for that matter). Why would anyone 
want this? 
        [Robin] In fact we tried the method you proposed. From our point of 
view, the basic design principle should be that the monitoring entity should be 
decoupled from the monitored entity. This is to avoid following cases:
        1. The failure of operation of the control protocol may affect the 
monitoring at the same time.
        2. The limitation of the control protocol will also have effect on the 
monitoring. For example, for the method of listening passively, if there are 
multiple hops between the listener and the network devices, it has to set up a 
tunnel as the virtual link for direct connection. But the TCP-based monitoring 
protocol need not care about it. 
        
        
        As far as where it belongs, we have a rather full agenda in LSR so I 
don't think we want to devote time to it there at IETF 102.  
        [Robin] Though the WG the draft should belong to is not determined yet, 
we think the work belongs to OPS area and send the notice to GROW WG and 
OPSAWG. We also applied for the presentation in the two WGs. We should have 
copied the notice to the related WGs of RTG area. So the LSR WG and RTGWG WG 
mailing list are added. More comments and suggestions are welcome.
        
        Thanks,
        Acee
        
        
        
        On 7/2/18, 8:20 AM, "GROW on behalf of Guyunan (Yunan Gu, IP Technology 
Research Dept. NW)" <grow-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of guyu...@huawei.com> 
wrote:
        
            Dear GROW & OPSAWG WGs,
            
            We have proposed a Network Monitoring Protocol (NMP) for the 
control plane OAM. NMP for ISIS is illustrated in this draft to showcase the 
benefit and operation of NMP. Yet, we haven't decided which WG it belongs to. 
        
           
            Comments and suggestions are very welcome! 
            
            Thank you!
            
            
            Yunan Gu
            Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd
            
            -----Original Message-----
            From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org] 
            Sent: 2018年7月2日 20:07
            To: Zhuangshunwan <zhuangshun...@huawei.com>; Lizhenbin 
<lizhen...@huawei.com>; Guyunan (Yunan Gu, IP Technology Research Dept. NW) 
<guyu...@huawei.com>
            Subject: New Version Notification for 
draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol-00.txt
            
            
            A new version of I-D, draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol-00.txt
            has been successfully submitted by Yunan Gu and posted to the IETF 
repository.
            
            Name:               draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol
            Revision:   00
            Title:              Network Monitoring Protocol (NMP)
            Document date:      2018-07-02
            Group:              Individual Submission
            Pages:              15
            URL:            
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol-00.txt
            Status:         
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol/
            Htmlized:       
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol-00
            Htmlized:       
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gu-network-mornitoring-protol
            
            
            Abstract:
               To enable automated network OAM (Operations, administration and
               management), the availability of network protocol running status
               information is a fundamental step.  In this document, a network
               monitoring protocol (NMP) is proposed to provision the 
information
               related to running status of IGP (Interior Gateway Protocol) and
               other control protocols.  It can facilitate the network
               troubleshooting of control protocols in a network domain.  
Typical
               network issues are illustrated as the usecases of NMP for ISIS to
               showcase the necessity of NMP.  Then the operations and the 
message
               formats of NMP for ISIS are defined.  In this document ISIS is 
used
               as the illustration protocol, and the case of OSPF and other 
control
               protocols will be included in the future version.
            
            
                                                                                
              
            
            
            Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
            
            The IETF Secretariat
            
            _______________________________________________
            GROW mailing list
            g...@ietf.org
            https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
            
        
        _______________________________________________
        OPSAWG mailing list
        ops...@ietf.org
        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
        
    
    _______________________________________________
    Lsr mailing list
    Lsr@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
    


_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to