Ops Area DiscussionManagement Interface Refinement

Thomas Nadeau

Dan Romascanu

IETF 84 - Vancouver 1

Motivation

• Management Interface Requirements for WGs Evolution

• Evolve Guidance to and assistance for WGs• Update to RFC1052

2

3

What Are The Issues?

• Management requirements for WGs have not evolved for some time.– SNMP writes

• Need to evolve for all relevant interfaces• A need of per-workgroup tailoring– Ops “assistant” when relevant– Adjust charter to meet needs of WG and have

sufficient OPS work items.

Update to RFC1052

• history - 1052 has a historical introduction of its own, hot it is itself (ancient) history,

• What happened since (demise of CMIP, evolution of SNMP), RFC 3535, NETCONF and YANG

• 1052 had the concept of a 'short term' solution (SNMP) migrating to a 'long term solution' (CMI) using the same MIB. Why does not this work?

4

Rfc1052 con’t

• No one 'protocol fits all' solution is possible. No one data model can efficiently support multiple protocols. – ‘It’s not only about SNMP and MIBs any longer’

• Risk - 'Short term' becomes 'permanently' as the Internet permanently expands and needs to be managed as a collection of autonomous systems deployed at different layers Internet management

5

Conclusions/Next Steps

• Update 1052– Clean the historical balast– Adopt the an operational toolset/multiprotocol

approach– Include broader architectural view• Goals and Interaction between management protocols

and OAM protocols

• IESG discussion with WGs

6