Hey all, thanks for the feedback,
I see no problem with addressing these concrete concerns before adoption, it
really does not make much difference to me, the main thing is that the document
and its contents are useful to the group at large.
What I would suggest is that we could restructure to use RFC 5706 as a
template. I took a look at 5706 and listed out the table of contents and then
put ** besides things that I think are already covered in the existing draft
(see below).
The non asterisked items are the missing pieces that people feel need to be
addressed.
If there is agreement with this approach then we are happy to try to do this
and of course solicit input from the group on those missing pieces.
As to if it gets adopted before or after changes I leave that purely to the
discretion of the group/chairs. I don't mind either way.
Peter
2. Operational Considerations - How Will the New Protocol
Fit into the Current Environment? ...............................8
2.1. Operations .................................................9
2.2. Installation and Initial Setup .............................9
2.3. Migration Path ............................................10
2.4. Requirements on Other Protocols and Functional
Components ................................................11
2.5. Impact on Network Operation ...............................11
2.6. Verifying Correct Operation ...............................12 **
3. Management Considerations - How Will the Protocol Be Managed? ..12
3.1. Interoperability ..........................................14
3.2. Management Information ....................................17
3.2.1. Information Model Design ...........................18
3.3. Fault Management ..........................................18 **
3.3.1. Liveness Detection and Monitoring ..................19 **
3.3.2. Fault Determination ................................19 **
3.3.3. Root Cause Analysis ................................20 (some)
3.3.4. Fault Isolation ....................................20 **
3.4. Configuration Management ..................................20
3.4.1. Verifying Correct Operation ........................22 **
3.5. Accounting Management .....................................22
3.6. Performance Management ....................................22 **
3.6.1. Monitoring the Protocol ............................23 **
3.6.2. Monitoring the Device ..............................24 **
3.6.3. Monitoring the Network .............................24 **
3.6.4. Monitoring the Service .............................25 **
3.7. Security Management .......................................25
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Eric
Gray
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 11:24 AM
To: Melinda Shore
Cc: Bocci, Matthew (Matthew); [email protected]; Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Poll for WG adoption of
draft-ashwood-nvo3-operational-requirement-03
Makes sense.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Melinda
Shore
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 8:20 PM
To: Eric Gray
Cc: Bocci, Matthew (Matthew); [email protected]; Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Poll for WG adoption of
draft-ashwood-nvo3-operational-requirement-03
Importance: High
On 8/27/13 1:47 PM, Eric Gray wrote:
> So, my support for adoption of this draft depends on the authors
> willingness to make the modifications necessary for the draft to
> fulfill its role as intended in the WG charter.
I don't expect -00 working group drafts to be particularly good, and I don't
feel that adoption should be contingent on how close a document is to being
publication-ready. However, this one is so far off the mark that I think that
it might be a good idea if the authors revised it prior to the issuance of
another adoption call. The basic issue here is whether or not the authors
understand the issues that Dan raised. They've indicated that they're willing
to revise the draft according to his suggestions but frankly the charter text
really is very clear. I'm not opposed to adopting a draft by these authors but
I'm opposed to adopting
*this* draft.
Melinda
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
