Sanjai Narain | 2 Nov 04:20 2006

Configuration Validation Workshop at LISA-2006

Proposals are invited for presentation and panel discussion at a new 
Configuration Validation Session at the Configuration Workshop at USENIX 
LISA-2006. LISA is Large Installation System Administration and is the 
premiere conference in this area. The workshop is in Washington D.C., 
Monday, December 4. Our objective is to raise awareness of the need for 
end-to-end configuration validation at and across multiple layers. 
Please let me know if you would like to present and/or attend. The 
workshop pointer is 
http://homepages.informatics.ed.ac.uk/group/lssconf/config2006/index.html 
and a pointer to LISA is http://www.usenix.org/event/lisa06/

NOTE: Workshop registration is complementary for presenters. More 
information is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposals are invited for presentation and panel discussion on the topic 
of Configuration Validation. Proposers are requested to address the 
following questions:

What classes of end-to-end infrastructure requirements are realized? 
Example classes are security,  functionality, reliability and performance.

What business motivations are there for configuration validation, i.e., 
checking whether component configurations comply to these requirements? 
Examples are the cost of down time, cost of cyber attacks and the need 
to comply with government audit regulations. Subsidiary questions are:

 * If end-to-end requirements are violated, what fraction of root causes 
are configuration errors?
 * How many components are there in the infrastructure you manage?
 * What are sizes of configuration files for each component?
(Continue reading)

Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 2 Nov 09:09 2006

FW: [OPS-AREA] Open Office hours during next IETF meeting


-----Original Message-----
From: David Kessens [mailto:david.kessens <at> nokia.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 6:23 AM
To: ops-area <at> ietf.org
Subject: [OPS-AREA] Open Office hours during next IETF meeting

We have decided to hold two open office hour sessions during the IETF
week:

TUESDAY
   15:20-17:20 Ops & Management Area Office Hour

WEDNESDAY
   14:00-16.10 Ops & Management Area Office Hour

We don't have a room allocation yet. We will let you know in a separate
mail as soon as we know.

Anybody is welcome to come to our office hour to share his/her concerns,
to give us comments on how we can improve management of the area, to ask
general IETF related questions or to give you a chance to get to know us
a little bit.

See you in San Diego!

David & Dan
---

_______________________________________________
(Continue reading)

Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 2 Nov 10:34 2006

Comments on draft-farrel-pce-manageability-requirements-00.txt


First let me salute this I-D. I believe that it's useful for PCE, and an
evolution of this work can be useful for other WGs in the Routing Area
and in other Areas. 

A few comments:

1. The organization of the document does not follow its own
recommendation in Section 2.4, by not placing the Manageability
Considerations section immediately before the Security Considerations
section
2. I believe that a more appropriate title for the mandatory section
that is being proposed would be 'Operational and Manageability
Considerations'
3. In Section 2.1 it would be useful to give an example of a case when a
null (Operational and) Manageability Consideration section is justified.
For example, when the document extends and updates another document, and
the original section covers all necessary information. 
4. Section 3 should include a subsection detailing what management
operations are expected to be performed as result of the deployment of
the protocol - specifically if write operations will be allowed (on
routers? on hosts?), if notifications for alarms or other events will be
allowed
5. Section 3.1 could be extended to include information about
installation and initial deployment. Beyond the timers example Section
3.1 could also include information about default modes of operation and
default state of logical control variables. 
6. It would be useful to mention in Section 3.2 if read-write or only
read-only access is allowed for the information and/or data models
7. Section 3.5 deserves some editing for clarity. Is this about what
(Continue reading)

Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 5 Nov 18:36 2006

Mandatory Requirement for configuration by SNMP


I would like to hear the opinion of the MIB Doctors and OPS-NM folks
concerning the following. The Access Node Control Protocol (ANCP)
framework document
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ancp-framework-00.txt has
a management-related requirements section (Section 6) which is quite
nice. The issue is that the section includes MUST requirements for
configuration by SNMP. 

Is this what we want at this stage of evolution of the IETF management
protocols, or should we advice them to do something different? 

Dan

_______________________________________________
OPS-NM mailing list
OPS-NM <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm

Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 6 Nov 15:19 2006

Open Office hours during next IETF meeting


David and myself will be available to meet with any participant in the
IETF interested to discuss the Operations and Management area issues,
proposals, ideas, etc. 

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: David Kessens [mailto:david.kessens <at> nokia.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 2:52 AM
To: ops-area <at> ietf.org
Subject: [OPS-AREA] [david.kessens <at> nokia.com: Open Office hours during
nextIETF meeting]

We now know the location for our Office Hours:

TUESDAY

    15:20-17:20 Executive Center Room 2A - Ops & Management Area Office
Hour

WEDNESDAY

    14:00-16.10 Executive Center Room 2B - Ops & Management Area Office
Hour

We hope this helps,

David & Dan
---
(Continue reading)

Nguyen Manh Tho | 6 Nov 17:01 2006
Picon

ARES 2007 - Call for papers and workshops papers - Submission Deadline approaches in 2 weeks: 19-11-2006

Apologies for multiple copies due to cross postings. Please send to interested colleagues and students.

                          Call for Papers
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 The Second International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (AReS)
       ARES 2007 - "The International Security and Dependability Conference"

                    April 10th – April 13th,2007          
             Vienna University of Technology, Austria

                      http://www.ares-conf.org
                    http://www.ares-conference.eu
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Conference
----------------
The 1st International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security conference (ARES 2006)
has been successfully organized in Vienna, AUSTRIA from April 20 to April 22, 2006 by the Technical
University of Vienna in cooperation with the European Network and Security Agency (ENISA). We have
attracted 250 participants for this conference with its 3 keynotes speakers and its 9 workshops held
in conjunction with.

In continuation of the successful 1st ARES conference, The Second International Conference on Availability,
Reliability and Security (“ARES 2007 – The International Security and Dependability Conference”)
will bring together researchers and practitioners in the area of IT-Security and Dependability.

ARES 2007 will highlight the various aspects of security – with special focus on secure internet solutions,
trusted computing, digital forensics, privacy and organizational security issues.

ARES 2007 aims at a full and detailed discussion of the research issues of security as an integrative
concept that covers amongst others availability, safety, confidentiality, integrity, maintainability
and security in the different fields of applications.

Important Dates
----------------------
*  Submission Deadline: November, 19th 2006
*  Author Notification: January, 7th 2007
*  Author Registration: January, 21st 2007
*  Proceedings Version: January, 21st 2007

Workshops

-----------

In conjunction with the ARES 2007 conference, a number of workshops will be organized. We are very indebted for the effort of workshop's organizers and workshop's PC members. Proceedings of the ARES 2007 workshops will be published by IEEE Computer Society Press.

* Workshop 1: Second International Workshop "Dependability Aspects on Data WArehousing and Mining applications" (DAWAM 2007), Jimmy Huang, York University, Canada + Josef Schiefer, Senactive IT-Dienstleistungs GmbH, Austria + Nguyen Manh Tho, Vienna University of Technology, Austria. DAWAM 2007

Submission Deadline: December, 17th 2006

* Workshop 2: Second Workshop on "Dependability and Security in e-Government" (DeSeGov 2007), A Min Tjoa, Vienna University of Technology, Austria + Erich Schweighofer, University of Vienna, Austria + Nguyen Manh Tho, Vienna University of Technology, Austria DeSeGov 2007

Submission Deadline: December, 15th 2006

* Workshop 3: Workshop on Foundations of Fault-tolerant Distributed Computing (FOFDC 2007), Wilhelm Hasselbring, University of Oldenburg, Germany + Matthias Rohr, University of Oldenburg, Germany + Christian Storm, University of Oldenburg, Germany + Oliver Theel, University of Oldenburg, Germany + Timo Warns, University of Oldenburg, Germany. FOFDC 2007

Submission Deadline: December, 1st 2006

* Workshop 4: "Secure Software Engineering" (SecSE 2007), Torbjørn Skramstad, Norwegian University of Science and technology (NTNU) + Lillian Røstad, Norwegian University of Science and technology (NTNU) + Martin Gilje Jaatun, SINTEF ICT, Norway. SecSE 2007

Submission Deadline: December, 17th 2006

* Workshop 5: Workshop on "Event-Based IT Systems", Modeling, Designing, and Testing Correct, Secure, and Dependable Event-Based System, Stefan Biffl, Vienna University of Technology + Eva Kühn, Vienna University of Technology + Alexander Schatten, Vienna Univeristy of Techology EBITS 2007

Submission Deadline: November, 19th 2006

* Workshop 6: "Distributed Healthcare Availability, Reliability and Security" (DIHARES 2007), Thomas Clark, Complete Cardiology Services Ltd, USA. DIHARES 2007

Submission Deadline: November, 17th, 2006

* Workshop 7: "First International Workshop on Advances in Information Security" (WAIS 2007), Leonard Barolli, Fukuoka Institute of Technology, Japan + Arjan Durresi, Louisiana State University, USA + Hiroaki Kikuchi, Tokai university, Japan.WAIS 2007

Submission Deadline: December 1st, 2006

* Workshop 8: Second International Workshop on Bioinformatics and Security (BIOS 2007), Hochreiter Sepp, University of Linz, Bioinf, Austria + Küng Josef, University of Linz, FAW Austria + Wagner Roland, University of Linz, FAW Austria. BIOS 2007

Submission Deadline: November 20, 2006

* Workshop 9: Second International Workshop on Security and E-Learning, Edgar Weippl, Secure Business Austria. SEL 2007

Submission Deadline: November 19, 2006

* Workshop 10: Second Workshop on Information Security Risk Management (ISRM), Professor Dr. D. Karagiannis, University of Vienna, Austria + Dr. L. Marinos, ENISA, Greece . ISRM

* Workshop 11: The First International Workshop on Spoofing, Digital Forensics and Open Source Tools (SDFOST), Judie Mulholland,

Florida Cybersecurity Institute, USA. SDFOST

Submission Deadline: November 20, 2006

Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:
------------------------------------------------------------
* Process based Security Models and Methods
* Autonomous Computing
* Authorization and Authentication
* Availability and Reliability
* Common Criteria Protocol
* Cost/Benefit Analysis
* Cryptographic protocols
* Dependability Aspects for Special Applications (e.g. ERP-Systems, Logistics)
* Dependability Aspects of  Electronic Government (e-Government)
* Dependability administration
* Dependability in Open Source Software
* Designing Business Models with security requirements
* Digital Forensics
* E-Commerce Dependability
* Failure Prevention
* IPR of Security Technology
* Incident Response and Prevention
* Information Flow Control
* Internet Dependability
* Interoperability aspects
* Intrusion Detection and Fraud Detection
* Legal issues
* Mobile Security
* Network Security
* Privacy-enhancing technologies
* RFID Security and Privacy
* Risk planning, analysis & awareness
* Safety Critical Systems
* Secure Enterprise Architectures
* Security Issues for Ubiquitous Systems
* Security and Privacy in E-Health
* Security and Trust Management in P2P and Grid applications
* Security and privacy issues for sensor networks, wireless/mobile devices and applications
* Security as Quality of Service
* Security in Distributed Systems / Distributed Databases
* Security in Electronic Payments
* Security in Electronic Voting
* Software Engineering of Dependable Systems
* Software Security
* Standards, Guidelines and Certification
* Survivability of Computing Systems
* Temporal Aspects of Dependability
* Trusted Computing
* Tools for Dependable System Design and Evaluation
* Trust Models and Trust Management
* VOIP/Wireless Security

Submission Guidelines
-------------------------------
Authors are invited to submit research and application papers following the IEEE Computer Society Proceedings
Manuscripts style: two columns, single-spaced, including figures and references, using 10 fonts, and number
each page. You can confirm the IEEE Computer Society Proceedings Author Guidelines at the following web page:
URL: http://computer.org/cspress/instruct.htm

The Web site for paper registration and electronic submission is available at:
http://www.ares-conf.org/confdriver/?q=confdriver/papers/add

Please refer to ARES website (http://www.ares-conf.org or http://www.ares-conference.eu) for update information.

If you have any difficluty in submitting the papers, please do not hesitate to send them to tho <at> ifs.tuwien.ac.at

Honorary Co-Chairs
---------------------------
Norman Revell, Middlesex University, United Kingdom
Roland Wagner, University of Linz, Austria

General Co-Chairs
------------------------
Guenther Pernul, University of Regensburg, Germany
Makoto Takizawa, Tokyo Denki University, Japan

Program Co-Chairs
------------------------
Gerald Quirchmayr, University of Southern Australia, Australia
A Min Tjoa, Vienna University of Technology, Austria


Workshops Co-Chairs
---------------------------
Nguyen Manh Tho, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Abdelkader Hameurlain, University of Toulouse, France
Leonard Barolli, Fukuoka Institute of Technology (FIT), Japan


International Liaison Co-Chairs
---------------------------------------
Maria Wimmer, University of Koblenz-Landau, Germany
Charles Shoniregun, University of East London, United Kingdom


Publicity Chair
------------------
Vladimir Marik, Czech Technical University, Czech Republic


Publication Chair
---------------------
Monika Lanzenberger, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway


Local Organizing Chairs
------------------------------
Maria Schweikert, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Markus Klemen, Vienna University of Technology, Austria

Programme Committee
------------------------------
Jemal H. Abawajy, Deakin University, Australia
Karl Aberer, EPFL, Switzerland
Abiola Abimbola, Napier University, UK
Rafael Accorsi, University of Freiburg, Germany
Alessandro Acquisti, Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Andre Adelsbach, Telindus PSF S.A., Luxembourg
Vasilis Aggelis, PIRAEUS Bank (WINBANK), Greece
John Andrews, Loughborough, University, UK
Michael Backes, Saarland University, Germany
Leonard Barolli, Fukuoka Institute of Technology (FIT), Japan
Lisa Bartlett, Loughborough University, UK
Massimo Bartoletti, Universita' di Pisa, Italy
Darcy G. Benoit, Acadia University, Wolfville, Canada
Helmut Berger, E-Commerce Competence Center - EC3, Austria
Bharat Bhargava, Purdue University, USA
Christophe Blanchet, CNRS IBCP, France
Alexander Böhm, University of Mannheim, Germany
Stephane Bressan, National University of Singapore, Singapore
Luciano Burgazzi, ENEA, Italy
Kevin Butler, Pennsylvania State University, USA
Jesper Buus Nielsen , University of Aarhus, Denmark
Catharina Candolin, The Finnish Defence Forces. Finland
Jiannong Cao, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hongkong
Jordi Castellà-Roca, Rovira i Virgili University of Tarragona, Spain
David Chadwick, University of Kent, UK
Surendar Chandra, University of Notre Dame, USA
Guihai Chen, Nanjing University, China
Simon Christophe, Nancy University, France
Soon-Ae Chun, City University of New York, USA
Nathan Clarke, University of Plymouth, UK
Joey Coleman, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Gao Cong, University of Edinburgh, UK
Ricardo Corin, INRIA-MSR & University of Twente, The Netherlands
George Davida, University of Wisconsinat Milwaukee, USA
Robert H. Deng , Singapore Management University, Singapore
Jochen Dinger, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Germany
Lucia Draque Penso, University of Mannheim, Germany
Schahram Dustdar, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Christian Engelmann, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA
Yung-Chin Fang, Dell Inc., USA
Hannes Federrath, University of Regensburg, Germany
Pascal Felber, Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland
Elena Ferrari, University of Insubria, Italy
Sergio Flesca, DEIS – University of Calabria, Italy
Vincenzo De Florio, University of Antwerp, Belgium
Vladimir Fomichov, K.E. Tsiolkovsky Russian State Technological University, Russia
Jordi Forné, Technincal  Universtiy of Catalonia, Spain
Huirong Fu, Oakland University, MI, USA
Steven Furnell, University of Plymouth, UK
Javier Garcia-Villalba, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain
Matthew Gebski, University of New South Wales, Australia
Karl Goeschka, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Swapna S. Gokhale, University of Connecticut, USA
Marcin Gorawski, Silesian University of Technology, Poland
Stephan Groß, Technische Universität Dresde, Germany
Daniel Grosu, Wayne State University, USA
Michael Grottke, Duke University, USA
Le Gruenwald, University of Oklahoma, USA
Qijun Gu, Texas State University, USA
Yong Guan, Iowa State University, USA
Ibrahim Haddad, Open Source Development Labs, USA
Abdelkader Hameurlain, Paul Sabatier University, France
Marit Hansen, Independent Centre for Privacy Protection, USA
Naohiro Hayashibara, Tokyo Denki University, Japan
Xubin (Ben) He, Tennessee Technological University, USA
Yanxiang He, Wuhan University, China
Rattikorn Hewett, Texas Tech University, USA
Chin-Tser Huang, University of South Carolina, USA
Jimmy Huang, York University, Canada
Thomas Jensen, IRISA/CNRS, France
Zhen Jiang, West Chester University, USA
Hai Jin, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, China
Oliver Jorns, ftw. Forschungszentrum Telekommunikation Wien, Austria
Audun Josang, School of Software Engineering and Data Communications, Australia
Jan Jurjens, Munich University of Technology, Germany and Open University, UK
Holger Kenn, University of Bremen, Germany
Dogan Kesdogan, RWTH Aachen, Germany
Brian King, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, USA
Ted Krovetz, California State University, USA
Raphael Kunis, Chemnitz University of Technology, Germany
Helmut Kurth, Atsec Information Security, USA
Marc Lacoste, France Télécom R&D, France
Kwok-Yan Lam, Tsinghua University, China
Chokchai Box Leangsuksun, Louisiana Tech University, USA
Yih-Jiun Lee, Department of Information Management, CTU, Taiwan
Chin-Laung Lei, National Taiwan University, China
Philippe Leray, INSA (National Institute of Applied Sciences) of Rouen, France
Jun Li, University of Oregon, USA
Sam Lightstone, IBM Canada Ltd., Canada
Chae-Hoon Lim, Sejong University, Korea
Ching Lin, Macquarie University, Australia
Man Lin, St. Francis Xavier University, Canada
Alex Zhaoyu Liu, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
Tong Liu, Dell Inc, USA
Hua Liu , Xerox labs, USA
Javier Lopez, University of Malaga, Spain
Sanglu Lu, Nanjing University, China
Jianhua Ma, Hosei University, Japan
Qiang Ma, NEC, Japan
Josef Makolm, Federal Ministry of Finance, Austria
Carsten Maple, University of Luton, UK
Keith Martin , University of London, UK
Fabio Martinelli, National Research Council - C.N.R, Italy
BeniaminoDi Martino, Second University of Naples, Italy
Santiago Melia, University of Alicante, Spain
Nasrullah Memon, Aalborg University Esbjerg, Denmark
Geyong Min, University of Bradford, UK
George Mohay, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Marina Mongiello, Technical University of Bari, Italy
Stefania Montani, Universita' del Piemonte Orientale, Italy
Yi Mu, University of Wollongong, Australia
Junghyun Nam, Sungkyunkwan University, Korea
Priya Narasimhan, Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Tho Manh Nguyen, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Jesper Nielsen, University of Århus, Denmark
Thomas Nowey, University of Regensburg, Germany
Tomas Olovsson, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
Hong Ong, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA
Maria Papadaki, University of Plymouth, UK
Manish Parashar, Rutgers University, USA
Fernando Pedone, University of Lugano, Switzerland
MariaS. Perez, UPM, Spain
Günther Pernul, University of Regensburg, Germany
Rob Peters, University of Amsterdam, The Neitherland
Thomas Phan, IBM Research, USA
Mario Piattini, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain
Makan Pourzandi, Ericsson Canada, Canada
Christopher Price, University of Wales Aberystwyth, UK
Jean-Jacques Quisquater, Universite catholique de Louvain, Belgium
Wenny Rahayu, La Trobe University, Australia
Indrajit Ray, Colorado State University, USA
Domenico Rosaci, University "Mediterranea" of Reggio Calabria, Italy
Heiko Rossnagel, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany
Bimal Roy, Indian Statistical Institute, India
Kenji Saito, Keio University, Japan
Kouichi Sakurai, Kyushu University, Japan
BiplabK. Sarker , University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, Canada
Ingrid Schaumüller-Bichl, FH OÖ Campus Hagenberg, Austria
Stephen L. Scott, Oak Ridge National Laboratory - USA
Dharmaraja Selamuthu, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, India
Tony Shan, Wachovia Bank, USA
Thomas Shrimpton, Portland State University, USA
Richard Sinnott, University of Glasgow, UK
Amund Skavhaug, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
Agusti Solanas, Rovira i Virgili University, Spain
Alexander Speirs, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Katarina Stanoevska-Slabeva, University St. Gallen, Switzerland
Ketil Stølen, SINTEF & University of Oslo, Norway
Aaron Striegel, University of Notre Dame, USA
Peter Struss, Munich University of Technology, Germany
Tsuyoshi Takagi, Future University - Hakodate, Japan
Makoto Takizawa, Tokyo Denki University, Japan
Oliver Theel, University of Oldenburg, Germany
Björn Thuresson, KTH Computer Science and Communication, Sweden
A Min Tjoa, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Kishor Trivedi, Duke University, USA
Juan Trujillo, University of Alicante, Spain
Alexander W. Tsow, Indiana University, USA
Tomas Uribe, SRI International, USA
Kalyan Vaidyanathan, Sun Microsystems, USA
Luca Vigano, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
Umberto Villano, Universita' del Sannio, Italy
Melanie Volkamer, DFKI - German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence, Germany
Michael Waidner, IBM Software Group, Switzerland
Carine Webber, Universidade de Caxias do Sul, Brazil
Edgar Weippl, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Robert Willison, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark
Maria Wimmer, University of Koblenz-Landau, Germany
Matthew Wright, University of Texas at Arlington, USA
Qinghan Xiao , Defence R&D Canada, Canada
Liudong Xing, University of Massachusetts, USA
Cheng-Zhong Xu, Wayne State University, USA
Mariemma.I. Yagüe, University of Malaga, Spain
Jeff Yan, Newcastle University, UK
Laurence Yang, St. Francis Xavier University, Canada
Alec Yasinsac, Florida State University, USA
George Yee, National Research Council, Canada
Sung-Ming Yen, National Central University, Taiwan
Xun Yi, Victoria University, USA
Meng Yu, Monmouth University, USA
William Yurcik, University of Illinois, USA
Nicola Zannone, University of Trento, Italy
Jianhong Zhang, North China University of Technology, China
Liqiang Zhang, Indiana University South Bend, USA
Jianying Zhou, Institute for Infocomm Research, Singapore
Xudong Zhu, Alcatel shangHai Bell Co. LTD., China
Enrico Zio, Polytechnic of Milan, Italy

_______________________________________________
OPS-NM mailing list
OPS-NM <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm
David B Harrington | 5 Nov 19:34 2006
Picon
Picon

RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement for configuration by SNMP

Hi,

At this point in the evolution of IETF management, we have only one
management protocol that is widely deployed and offers vendor-neutral
interoperability. No other IETF-related protocol offers the
widley-deployed standardized generic management capabilities of SNMP.
I believe therefore, we should recommend only SNMP as a viable generic
purpose management protocol at this time.

Since possible alternatives are on the horizon, and the IETF
management framework has always permitted the support for alternative
protocols for carrying MIB module data, I suggest that any long-lived
requirements section RECOMMEND, but not REQUIRE, SNMP so that
alternative protocols could be used in the future to meet these
management functionality requirements.

However, I believe that MIB modules and support for SNMP should
continue to be required as a condition of IETF standards-track
advancement until suitable alternative solutions are completed and
available.

I have not read the complete ANCP document, just the management
requirements section, so some of my comments may be incorrect when
considered in light of the complete document.

Here is the list of management requirements:

6.  Management related requirements

   o  The configuration of the IP layer (e.g.  IP address assignment)
      for the Control Channel MUST be possible via SNMP on both the AN
      and the NAS.

Dbh:/MUST/SHOULD/

   o  When the operational status of the Control Channel is changed
      (up>down, down>up) a linkdown/linkup trap SHOULD be sent towards
      the EMS.  This requirement applies to both the AN and the NAS.

Dbh: agree

   o  The Access Node MUST provide the possibility using SNMP to
      associate individual DSL lines with specific Access Node Control
      Sessions.

Dbh: /MUST/SHOULD/

   o  The Access Node MUST notify the EMS of Access Node Control
      configuration changes in a timely manner.

Dbh: I think this is a requirement that is poorly specified. What is
timely? Is it a protocol **requirement** (ala RFC2119) that such
notification be received by the EMS to ensure the network continues to
operate properly, or is this MUST an attempt to strengthen a
nice-to-have feature rather than a real requirement of the protocol
interoperation? Is there a clear specification of what the EMS MUST do
after receiving such a required notification?

   o  The Access Node MUST provide a mechanism that allows the
      concurrent access on the same resource from several managers
(EMS
      via SNMP, NAS via ANCP).  Only one manager may perform a change
at
      a certain time.

Dbh: this is another requirement that seems poorly specified. How long
is a certain time? What is "one manager"? Does this mean SNMP and the
CLI cannot perform a change at the same time on the access node? What
if the change is to different aspects of the access node
functionality? Does ANCP provide a method for locking the management
processing to prevent concurrent access at a certain time, as Netconf
and COPS-PR have done?

The SNMP protocol allows concurrent access to functionality, including
SET functionality. The order in which SNMP messages are processed,
including for example the processing of concurrent messages on a
multi-threaded system, is an implementation-dependent decision. This
ANCP management requirement would require a change to the processing
model of SNMP.  

David Harrington
dharrington <at> huawei.com 
dbharrington <at> comcast.net
ietfdbh <at> comcast.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca <at> avaya.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 9:37 AM
> To: MIB Doctors; ops-nm <at> ietf.org
> Cc: Mark Townsley
> Subject: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement for 
> configuration by SNMP 
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to hear the opinion of the MIB Doctors and OPS-NM folks
> concerning the following. The Access Node Control Protocol (ANCP)
> framework document
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ancp-framework-
> 00.txt has
> a management-related requirements section (Section 6) which is quite
> nice. The issue is that the section includes MUST requirements for
> configuration by SNMP. 
> 
> Is this what we want at this stage of evolution of the IETF
management
> protocols, or should we advice them to do something different? 
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
> MIB-DOCTORS <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors
> 

_______________________________________________
OPS-NM mailing list
OPS-NM <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm

Randy Presuhn | 6 Nov 20:02 2006
Picon

Re: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement for configurationby SNMP

Hi -

> From: "David B Harrington" <dbharrington <at> comcast.net>
> To: "'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'" <dromasca <at> avaya.com>; "'MIB Doctors'" <mib-doctors <at> ietf.org>; <ops-nm <at> ietf.org>
> Cc: "'Mark Townsley'" <townsley <at> cisco.com>
> Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 10:34 AM
> Subject: [OPS-NM] RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement for configurationby SNMP 
...
> Since possible alternatives are on the horizon, and the IETF
> management framework has always permitted the support for alternative
> protocols for carrying MIB module data, I suggest that any long-lived
> requirements section RECOMMEND, but not REQUIRE, SNMP so that
> alternative protocols could be used in the future to meet these
> management functionality requirements.
> 
> However, I believe that MIB modules and support for SNMP should
> continue to be required as a condition of IETF standards-track
> advancement until suitable alternative solutions are completed and
> available.
...

I'm having trouble fitting these two paragraphs together.
The first is consistent with the changes suggested, but
the second is a strong argument against making those
changes.

Randy

_______________________________________________
OPS-NM mailing list
OPS-NM <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm

David B Harrington | 6 Nov 21:14 2006
Picon
Picon

RE: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement forconfigurationby SNMP

Hi Randy,

I think we need to prepare other WGs to move to a multi-protocol
Management Framework, but we do not yet have a standardized
multi-protocol solution for them to move to. Until we have a data
model for netconf (presuming netconf will be the second NM protocol
supported), we should still stress the importance of making IETF
technologies manageable with standardized NM solutions. 

That means we still need to stress the importance of providing a data
model in our only existng standard data modeling language, SMIv2,
until a new data modeling language becomes available.

Between now and then we should ask the managed-technology WGs to
develop a MIB module for management now, and request a corresponding
information model that can be used to develop a netconf data model
later.

AND between now and then, the management protocol development
community needs to figure out how to make the two protocols
compatible, so we do not have two standard protocols that cannot share
information.

David Harrington
dharrington <at> huawei.com 
dbharrington <at> comcast.net
ietfdbh <at> comcast.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Presuhn [mailto:randy_presuhn <at> mindspring.com] 
> Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 11:03 AM
> To: 'MIB Doctors'; ops-nm <at> ietf.org
> Cc: 'Mark Townsley'
> Subject: Re: [OPS-NM] RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement 
> forconfigurationby SNMP 
> 
> Hi -
> 
> > From: "David B Harrington" <dbharrington <at> comcast.net>
> > To: "'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'" <dromasca <at> avaya.com>; "'MIB 
> Doctors'" <mib-doctors <at> ietf.org>; <ops-nm <at> ietf.org>
> > Cc: "'Mark Townsley'" <townsley <at> cisco.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 10:34 AM
> > Subject: [OPS-NM] RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement 
> for configurationby SNMP 
> ...
> > Since possible alternatives are on the horizon, and the IETF
> > management framework has always permitted the support for 
> alternative
> > protocols for carrying MIB module data, I suggest that any 
> long-lived
> > requirements section RECOMMEND, but not REQUIRE, SNMP so that
> > alternative protocols could be used in the future to meet these
> > management functionality requirements.
> > 
> > However, I believe that MIB modules and support for SNMP should
> > continue to be required as a condition of IETF standards-track
> > advancement until suitable alternative solutions are completed and
> > available.
> ...
> 
> I'm having trouble fitting these two paragraphs together.
> The first is consistent with the changes suggested, but
> the second is a strong argument against making those
> changes.
> 
> Randy
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
> MIB-DOCTORS <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors
> 

_______________________________________________
OPS-NM mailing list
OPS-NM <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm

Wijnen, Bert (Bert | 6 Nov 21:28 2006
Picon

RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement for configuration by SNMP

I can live with a a MUST allow for SNMP config, if that is
what the WG consciously decided for (has consensus on).

I saw DBH comment too. I can also live with a SHOULD,
but it does make the potential interoperability less sure.
The reason DBH mentions sounds fine, but they can always
relax (i.e. update the RFC0 if/when in the future we have
a new/other/alternative/better protocol available.

my 2 cents

Bert

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca <at> avaya.com]
> Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 09:37
> To: MIB Doctors; ops-nm <at> ietf.org
> Cc: Mark Townsley
> Subject: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement for 
> configuration by SNMP 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to hear the opinion of the MIB Doctors and OPS-NM folks
> concerning the following. The Access Node Control Protocol (ANCP)
> framework document
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ancp-framework-
> 00.txt has
> a management-related requirements section (Section 6) which is quite
> nice. The issue is that the section includes MUST requirements for
> configuration by SNMP. 
> 
> Is this what we want at this stage of evolution of the IETF management
> protocols, or should we advice them to do something different? 
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
> MIB-DOCTORS <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors
> 

_______________________________________________
OPS-NM mailing list
OPS-NM <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm


Gmane