Subject: [Mpls-interop] short report from the NM sub-team meeting today

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:45:29 +0100

All,

we had the first meeting of the JWT sub-team on Network Management
earlier today.

Attendees: Ron, Loa, Kam, Chen and Malcolm.

Vi discussed based on the slides (wd18) the ITU-T folks used in Geneva.

http://ties.itu.int/ftp/public/itu-t/ahtmpls/readandwrite/doc_exchange/0802_geneva/ 

Ron and I had a couple of high(er) level questions and some questions
for clarification.

It seems like a basic requirement is that a transport profile for
mpls should be possible to operate, maintained and managed as if
it were an SDH network.

This caused us to ask how do you to e.g. SES and other things that
work well with SDH, but does not work well with packet networks.

We also questioned why they were willing to sacrifice good and tested
management tools just because they don't fit into the SDH toolbox.

We also agreed that we are dependent on the OAM subgroup to feed some
"need to be managed/configured" parameters in to the NM work.

Some of the responses were along the lines of "Well, the way we do
things in transport networks..." and "Well, the way we do things in
t-mpls ...". There also seems to be willingness to discuss the
high-level issues.

We said that we will look at the NM docs further and work out on the
mailing list if we need more air-time than our next meeting April 2.

If necessary we will include a (limited few) extra people.

/Loa

-- 
Loa Andersson

Principal Networking Architect
Acreo AB                           phone:  +46 8 632 77 14
Isafjordsgatan 22                  mobile: +46 739 81 21 64
Kista, Sweden                      email:  [email-masked]
                                            [email-masked]
_______________________________________________
Mpls-interop mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop

---

From: David Ward <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:07:04 -0500

Loa, et al -

It is critical that we have an architectural diagram of the IP/MPLS  
(IETF) NM layered design. Then we can map functions of the FCAPS  
requirements into the appropriate blocks if possible.

e.g. perf management == ipfix (netflow), event == (syslog, SNMP  
alerts, informs), etc

-DWard