Randy:
We feel that we are victim of this discussion with confusing title. I don’t 
want to comment on whether the intent is right or it is time for intent or not, 
you have your judgement, but:
1. The liaison is sent to NMRG instead of this WG since they believe the more 
relevant work is over there. (https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1724/)
2. The intent in different context means different things, intent translation, 
intent mapping, combining with AL/ML is not in the scope of this work.
3. The ECA model borrows similar concept from RMON which is successfully 
specified by IETF, ROMN is extension of SNMP, provides traffic flow data for 
troubleshooting and provides the control to adjust for better performance. So 
why not ECA
4. ECA is abstracted from bottom up and use telemetry protocol as a good basis 
and provide a clear semantics which is different from intent you quoted from 
elsewhere.

-Qin
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: netmod [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Randy Presuhn
发送时间: 2021年3月18日 6:47
收件人: [email protected]
主题: Re: [netmod] ECA Policy: What is an adequate abstraction level to express 
policies and intent

Hi -

On 2021-03-17 4:15 AM, tom petch wrote:
> From: netmod <[email protected]> on behalf of Randy Presuhn 
> <[email protected]>
> Sent: 10 March 2021 18:28
> On 2021-03-10 12:43 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>> Dear Qin,
>>
>> I believe this work repeats failures of the past but since the WG 
>> agreed to entertain this, I will keep my mouth shut. I suggest you do 
>> not spend your energy to convince the that this work is viable since 
>> it is rather unlikely that I will change my mind.
> 
> <tp>
> 
> Meanwhile the ITU-T has just liaised the IETF that it is starting work on 
> intent-based management.  I have not looked to see if the same words mean the 
> same thing but guess that they do.

:-)  A risky guess, based on my experience.  I vividly remember an
X3T5.4 meeting in which we *thought* we were wrapping things up, until someone 
(me) foolishly drew an E-R diagram on the whiteboard, causing us to realize 
that although we thought we had reached agreement, we had in fact been using 
the same words strung together in the same order to talk about radically 
different models.

Randy

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to