Subject: RE: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, "Jean-Francois Mule" <[email-masked]>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, Eduardo Cardona <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Sumanth Channabasappa <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:07:59 +0200
List-Id: Network Management Research Group <nmrg.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>

I can volunteer to be one of the scribes. 

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 24 February, 2005 9:12 PM
> To: Jean-Francois Mule
> Cc: Margaret Wasserman; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Cullen 
> Jennings; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; 
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; Sumanth 
> Channabasappa; Eduardo Cardona
> Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg 
> workshop on voip management
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 10:33:45AM -0700, Jean-Francois Mule wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> Jean-Francois and all others, thanks for all your input and the
> discussion that was kicked off. I was trying to summarize the
> issues that were mentioned here concerning VoIP management (and 
> I am sure I missed some). Here is my high-level list:
> 
> VoIP management issues:
> 
> a) call quality monitoring (loss, latency, jitter)
> b) reliability (standy configurations)
> c) emergency service capabilities
> d) expected call quality and maximum call volume prediction
> e) diagnose VoIP problems
> f) security
> g) gateway utilization monitoring
> h) device provisioning models (using web services-like interfaces)
> i) device management behind NATs and firewalls
> j) mechanisms to secure software download
> 
> For some issues, people actually posted much more detailed 
> descriptions
> and we had some controversy where management is needed and how
> distributed and self-organizing it can be.
> 
> Rather than just having a nice discussion and an email archive that
> we then ignore, I think it is useful to start a document which tries
> to capture the management challenges and questions related to VoIP.
> As a first step, one could take the issue list plus some descriptive
> text and turn that into some document. Who is willing to help editing
> something like that?
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 
> 28725 Bremen, Germany
> 

From: "Alan Clark" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, "Jean-Francois Mule" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:05:31 -0500
Importance: Normal
Cc: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Eduardo Cardona <[email-masked]>, Sumanth Channabasappa <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]

Juergen

I'd like to help with editing such a document, particularly related to
performance related issues (a, d, e, g, i)

Regards

Alan

-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 2:12 PM
To: Jean-Francois Mule
Cc: Margaret Wasserman; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Cullen Jennings;
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; Sumanth Channabasappa; Eduardo Cardona
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on
voip management

On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 10:33:45AM -0700, Jean-Francois Mule wrote:

[...]

Jean-Francois and all others, thanks for all your input and the
discussion that was kicked off. I was trying to summarize the
issues that were mentioned here concerning VoIP management (and
I am sure I missed some). Here is my high-level list:

VoIP management issues:

a) call quality monitoring (loss, latency, jitter)
b) reliability (standy configurations)
c) emergency service capabilities
d) expected call quality and maximum call volume prediction
e) diagnose VoIP problems
f) security
g) gateway utilization monitoring
h) device provisioning models (using web services-like interfaces)
i) device management behind NATs and firewalls
j) mechanisms to secure software download

For some issues, people actually posted much more detailed descriptions
and we had some controversy where management is needed and how
distributed and self-organizing it can be.

Rather than just having a nice discussion and an email archive that
we then ignore, I think it is useful to start a document which tries
to capture the management challenges and questions related to VoIP.
As a first step, one could take the issue list plus some descriptive
text and turn that into some document. Who is willing to help editing
something like that?

/js

--
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

From: <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, "'Jean-Francois Mule'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 13:58:50 -0600
Organization: sinnreich.net
Cc: 'Cullen Jennings' <[email-masked]>, "'Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)'" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], 'Margaret Wasserman' <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], 'Eduardo Cardona' <[email-masked]>, 'Sumanth Channabasappa' <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Myabe one-tow more item to add would be:

 h. Self organizing VoIP systems like Skype or P2P SIP,
 i. Separation of the network from the application for VoIP.

The above reflect the exisiting public VoIP services.

Thanks, Henry 

-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 1:12 PM
To: Jean-Francois Mule
Cc: Margaret Wasserman; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Cullen Jennings;
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; Sumanth Channabasappa; Eduardo Cardona
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip
management

On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 10:33:45AM -0700, Jean-Francois Mule wrote:

[...]

Jean-Francois and all others, thanks for all your input and the discussion
that was kicked off. I was trying to summarize the issues that were
mentioned here concerning VoIP management (and I am sure I missed some).
Here is my high-level list:

VoIP management issues:

a) call quality monitoring (loss, latency, jitter)
b) reliability (standy configurations)
c) emergency service capabilities
d) expected call quality and maximum call volume prediction
e) diagnose VoIP problems
f) security
g) gateway utilization monitoring
h) device provisioning models (using web services-like interfaces)
i) device management behind NATs and firewalls
j) mechanisms to secure software download

For some issues, people actually posted much more detailed descriptions and
we had some controversy where management is needed and how distributed and
self-organizing it can be.

Rather than just having a nice discussion and an email archive that we then
ignore, I think it is useful to start a document which tries to capture the
management challenges and questions related to VoIP.
As a first step, one could take the issue list plus some descriptive text
and turn that into some document. Who is willing to help editing something
like that?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 20:12:02 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: Jean-Francois Mule <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Mail-Followup-To: Jean-Francois Mule <[email-masked]>, Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>, Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], Sumanth Channabasappa <[email-masked]>, Eduardo Cardona <[email-masked]>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Eduardo Cardona <[email-masked]>, Sumanth Channabasappa <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 10:33:45AM -0700, Jean-Francois Mule wrote:

[...]

Jean-Francois and all others, thanks for all your input and the
discussion that was kicked off. I was trying to summarize the
issues that were mentioned here concerning VoIP management (and 
I am sure I missed some). Here is my high-level list:

VoIP management issues:

a) call quality monitoring (loss, latency, jitter)
b) reliability (standy configurations)
c) emergency service capabilities
d) expected call quality and maximum call volume prediction
e) diagnose VoIP problems
f) security
g) gateway utilization monitoring
h) device provisioning models (using web services-like interfaces)
i) device management behind NATs and firewalls
j) mechanisms to secure software download

For some issues, people actually posted much more detailed descriptions
and we had some controversy where management is needed and how
distributed and self-organizing it can be.

Rather than just having a nice discussion and an email archive that
we then ignore, I think it is useful to start a document which tries
to capture the management challenges and questions related to VoIP.
As a first step, one could take the issue list plus some descriptive
text and turn that into some document. Who is willing to help editing
something like that?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:33:45 -0700
From: "Jean-Francois Mule" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Eduardo Cardona <[email-masked]>, Sumanth Channabasappa <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]

Juergen and all,

   Interesting discussion. Here's some personal input.

Juergen asked:
> > a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
Yes, on my side: absolutely.

You also asked:
> > I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I need your 
> > help to get the right people together and I need strong indications 
> > that there is enough interest to justify time investment.

   There were good discussions from all about the decoupling of the voip service provider from the network provider and whether we mean "management" in a user-driven model or a service provider-driven model. I would agree wholeheartdly with Cullen, that in either case, consumers would benefit from more "management" capabilities at the application (V in VoIP) and (o in VoIP)network layers (IP in VoIP).
To build on an example from Henry, my cell phone has some kind of indicators of connectivity to the BSC/MSC via those bars that mean something to the end users (remember the cool AT&T wireless ad for the mass during the olympics).

   Topics of interest to me:
	- device provisioning models using web services-like interfaces (that may be where we could plug in the netconf/webdav/sip xcap/sip config framework discussions). Some of the mentioned VoIP services (Vonage, skype) hardcode some info in the devices... There should be models here that could allow users and/or operators to configure pieces of the service definition in a flexible manner (the operator does http download of the config params upon service activation or device boot up - params described in an extensible langage format, while as an end-user, I fire up my firefox browser and for the same device, I allow tell the device that if my personal pref is to use encrypted sig and media for all my communications but if my son logs in on that sip device, he is ok with no sRTP). May be that is bad example but you see the range of options.

	- device management behind NATs and firewalls: 
this is something that is not specific to VoIP.
    a) how can users or service providers get devices behind NATs and firewalls to return some useful information about their status (provisioning status, led status, software upgrade mode, etc.), the service state (SIP, presence, etc.), the network state as perceived by the device (this is where I think we missed some points earlier), the voice quality status (rtcp xr rfc3611), etc. -- equivalent to snmp get/get bulk
    b) how can users or service providers get devices to change an entire config file or just one parameter -- snmp set
SNNP is not going to cut it even in well-"behave"d environments. As an end-user, I basically have to ssh in my home net to then get a view of my ip services using CLI. I can live with it but shouldn't we have higher goals (to manage large scale voip networks with various service control models)?
If this is a done deal and defined somewhere, btw - let me know, this is a priority for us.

In SIP, we're starting to see interesting models: use the established signaling links to trigger the device to push some data back. Is this a viable and scalable model to manage IP-based services behind NATs?
There is a bunch of toolkits using various ietf protocols out there that we can leverage but getting some folks talk about their needs/requirements and some others talk about how they would like to manage networks would help define some directions (and some conclusions may be - do nothing but I highly doubt it).

	- mechanisms to secure software download (device config file, device code image): 
is it: 
http://ietfreport.isoc.org/all-ids/draft-housley-cms-fw-wrap-11.txt
Or, is it what the cable MSOs and CableLabs have defined it for cable modems and packetcable voip devices deployed in millions using the poorly secured tftp or more suitable http/https protocols?
Or something else for sip-based voip networks?
Again, it still matters for user models (I may like to run an open source tool on my linux home server that can serve my pingtel phone as well as my fwd client and my instant messaging client - all of which share what outbound sip proxy they use on my home network, where to send incoming sip event notifications to based on where I am), etc.
As a device manufacturer, some vendors may appreciate having not one way but a number of guidelines for a couple ways of doing those kinds of things the same way for residential/enterprise/service provider environments, whether they sell sip boxes to provider x, enterprise y or to user b. And may be this would allow me to run a cvs diff on all my device config files to make sure nobody hacked into them and uploaded a hacked config file that allows them to make voice calls on my behalf.

All I can say is that I think we would benefit from some guidance on how to do things better here so that we don't develop multiple methods of doing the same thing.

Jean-Francois 
---
Jean-François Mulé
CableLabs
office: +1 303 661 3708
email: [email-masked]

From: <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:07:14 -0600
Organization: sinnreich.net
Cc: 'Cullen Jennings' <[email-masked]>, "'Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)'" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], 'Margaret Wasserman' <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

 Juergen,

>who is going to provide properties such as quality

What is the question: Bandwidth is the answer! :-)
 
>and reliability now that many more players are going to be involved

Geographic diversity and Internet-centric reliability. Both the Sept 11
attack in the US and the recent floods in Central Europe have proven that
Internet communications did not fail, while telcos and wireless were out of
service for days and weeks. Telco central offices and centralized control
are a disaster waiting to happen, no matter how much the five nines PR
stories (99.999%) try to obfuscate this simple truth.

Henry

-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 1:48 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: 'Margaret Wasserman'; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Cullen Jennings';
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip
management

On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 07:50:02PM -0600, [email-masked] wrote:

> No network management is used by any public/consumer VoIP provider 
> today, for the simple reason that they don't own any network
infrastrucure.

I agree that this is a very major point. VoIP really separates the VoIP
service provider from the network service provider (and this is in my view
the biggest thread to classic telcos who used to sell both mixed together).
This separation creates a lot of opportunities for new players in the market
but it also raises the question who is going to provide properties such as
quality and reliability now that many more players are going to be involved.

I think we are facing some interesting years full of changes.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 14:47:33 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Mail-Followup-To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 02:17:14PM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
 
> Your employer must be rich :-) Not all customers can afford a separate 
> enterprise infrastructure for voice (and fiber-based). 

All universities / enterprises I have been with so far had (sometimes
too) separate voice and data networks. And even if you run things over
a single physical cable, you will logically separate the traffic from
the classic phones into a separate VLAN or whatever technology you
can use.

> But even in this 
> case there is a cost for provisioning the IP telephony system (users 
> rights and preferences, dial-plans, etc.), administering moves and 
> changes, maintaining the network that is rather independent of the 
> infrastructure, etc. to make the miracle happen. I believe that this 
> is part of the scope of 'VoIP management'.

Sure, these tasks do not go away. But the question is to which extend
you want/need new approaches to support/automate such tasks.

> Without trying to exercise on you the marketing pitch of the companies 
> selling VoIP I would point that there are other arguments than just 
> cost. One of them is the application integration, which in some 
> cases makes use of the capabilities to run concurrent multi-media 
> services from the same host. These include a mix of voice, video, 
> messaging, file transfer, Web access, etc. which not only runs on 
> the same hosts and through the same cables, bridges, routers, but 
> also makes the infrastructure and services configuration a more 
> complex and challenging task.

Believe it or not, there are lots of users who like phones more or
less as they are. For those enterprises I am familiar with, cost was 
the real motivation to look at VoIP solutions, not necessarily added 
features. And if I look at colleagues and students here on our 
international campus, many of them use some VoIP services to call 
their friends at home. And the prime reason to get started using
VoIP is again cost and not added features. (Talking into a computer
is not necessarily a better experience compared to using a phone.)

I believe that the VoIP move is driven by many different things, 
several most likely heavily influenced by regional differences.
The cost reduction motivation I have observed might be less 
significant in other regions of the world.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 14:17:14 +0200
From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 24 February, 2005 1:52 PM
> 
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 11:21:00AM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> 
> > Yes...
> > 
> > ...but there is also the 'Intranet' deployment scenario that is of 
> > interest for many customers in the enterprise market. These 
> customers 
> > do own in many cases both their network infrastructure and the VoIP 
> > service. It's not always a fully controlled environment, because on 
> > distributed deployments they need to run their inter-site 
> links over 
> > networking infrastructure that is not under their full control or 
> > does not belong to them (sometimes). The level of control over the 
> > infrastructure is however higher than in the case of a VoIP service 
> > provider in the wild Internet. 
> 
> The enterprise which pays me was considering to switch over to VoIP
> and I guess we are very similar to other enterprises. We have several
> fibers which are currently exclusively used to run phone calls. If
> we were to switch to VoIP, we would simply use the same fibers to
> run IP and the phone calls via VoIP. In other words, we would keep
> the core phone network separated from the core data network since
> we already have the separate fibers in place. Sure, there would be
> a place where we would cross over to the public network so that we
> can route voice traffic directly into other voice networks. But
> this would be a very carefully designed gateway. Since I assume
> a separate dedicated VoIP network within an enterprise, the 
> assumption that it is simply good enough to provide the desired
> transport service might actually be valid.
> 
> The real reason to look for VoIP is actually the extraordinary 
> prices for traditional enterprise phone systems. But they are 
> coming down quickly now.
> 
> /js

Your employer must be rich :-) Not all customers can afford a separate enterprise infrastructure for voice (and fiber-based). But even in this case there is a cost for provisioning the IP telephony system (users rights and preferences, dial-plans, etc.), administering moves and changes, maintaining the network that is rather independent of the infrastructure, etc. to make the miracle happen. I believe that this is part of the scope of 'VoIP management'.

Without trying to exercise on you the marketing pitch of the companies selling VoIP I would point that there are other arguments than just cost. One of them is the application integration, which in some cases makes use of the capabilities to run concurrent multi-media services from the same host. These include a mix of voice, video, messaging, file transfer, Web access, etc. which not only runs on the same hosts and through the same cables, bridges, routers, but also makes the infrastructure and services configuration a more complex and challenging task. 

Regards,

Dan

Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:52:02 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Mail-Followup-To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 11:21:00AM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:

> Yes...
> 
> ...but there is also the 'Intranet' deployment scenario that is of 
> interest for many customers in the enterprise market. These customers 
> do own in many cases both their network infrastructure and the VoIP 
> service. It's not always a fully controlled environment, because on 
> distributed deployments they need to run their inter-site links over 
> networking infrastructure that is not under their full control or 
> does not belong to them (sometimes). The level of control over the 
> infrastructure is however higher than in the case of a VoIP service 
> provider in the wild Internet. 

The enterprise which pays me was considering to switch over to VoIP
and I guess we are very similar to other enterprises. We have several
fibers which are currently exclusively used to run phone calls. If
we were to switch to VoIP, we would simply use the same fibers to
run IP and the phone calls via VoIP. In other words, we would keep
the core phone network separated from the core data network since
we already have the separate fibers in place. Sure, there would be
a place where we would cross over to the public network so that we
can route voice traffic directly into other voice networks. But
this would be a very carefully designed gateway. Since I assume
a separate dedicated VoIP network within an enterprise, the 
assumption that it is simply good enough to provide the desired
transport service might actually be valid.

The real reason to look for VoIP is actually the extraordinary 
prices for traditional enterprise phone systems. But they are 
coming down quickly now.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:21:00 +0200
From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 24 February, 2005 9:48 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: 'Margaret Wasserman'; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); 'Cullen 
> Jennings'; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; 
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg 
> workshop on voip management
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 07:50:02PM -0600, [email-masked] wrote:
> 
> > No network management is used by any public/consumer VoIP 
> provider today,
> > for the simple reason that they don't own any network infrastrucure.
> 
> I agree that this is a very major point. VoIP really separates the
> VoIP service provider from the network service provider (and this is
> in my view the biggest thread to classic telcos who used to sell
> both mixed together). This separation creates a lot of opportunities
> for new players in the market but it also raises the question who
> is going to provide properties such as quality and reliability now
> that many more players are going to be involved.
> 

Yes...

...but there is also the 'Intranet' deployment scenario that is of interest for many customers in the enterprise market. These customers do own in many cases both their network infrastructure and the VoIP service. It's not always a fully controlled environment, because on distributed deployments they need to run their inter-site links over networking infrastructure that is not under their full control or does not belong to them (sometimes). The level of control over the infrastructure is however higher than in the case of a VoIP service provider in the wild Internet. 

Regards,

Dan

> 

Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 08:48:01 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Mail-Followup-To: [email-masked], 'Margaret Wasserman' <[email-masked]>, "'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'" <[email-masked]>, 'Cullen Jennings' <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: 'Cullen Jennings' <[email-masked]>, "'Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)'" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked], 'Margaret Wasserman' <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 07:50:02PM -0600, [email-masked] wrote:

> No network management is used by any public/consumer VoIP provider today,
> for the simple reason that they don't own any network infrastrucure.

I agree that this is a very major point. VoIP really separates the
VoIP service provider from the network service provider (and this is
in my view the biggest thread to classic telcos who used to sell
both mixed together). This separation creates a lot of opportunities
for new players in the market but it also raises the question who
is going to provide properties such as quality and reliability now
that many more players are going to be involved.

I think we are facing some interesting years full of changes.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

From: <[email-masked]>
To: "'Margaret Wasserman'" <[email-masked]>, "'Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)'" <[email-masked]>, "'Cullen Jennings'" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>,  <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:50:02 -0600
Organization: sinnreich.net
Cc: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Margaret,

Great minds think alike! (I am not trying to be funny). I also share the
view that VoIP works very well on the Internet 'as is', or there would be no
Vonage or Skype or all the other existing public VoIP providers. My Packet8
video phone works also OK, so does XTEN eyeBeam and Microsoft Live
Communications Client (the successor to the Windows Messenger).

No network management is used by any public/consumer VoIP provider today,
for the simple reason that they don't own any network infrastrucure.

Obviously one has to avoid network congestion, but this is a generic
requirement, not VoIP specific. Using codecs designed for the Internet like
the iLBC also helps, instead of running fossils like G.711 and G.729, as are
still unfortunately in use in most IP-PSTN gateways.

"QoS does not create bandwidth" (Dr. Lixia Zhang, UCLA)

Henry 

-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 6:56 AM
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); [email-masked]; Cullen Jennings;
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip
management

Personally, I think that this is a really interesting question...

Put another way, does VOIP infrastructure really differ enough from IP
infrastructure that they need their own configuration protocols? 
If so, what is different about it that makes network configuration protocols
inadequate?  Could we modify/extend existing network configuration protocols
to make them more useful for VOIP?

Margaret

At 2:14 PM +0200 2/21/05, Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\) wrote:
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C5180E.DED98ED6"

Let me stir a little bit more the pot and raise another item that I believe
is worth being discussed in the projected workshop. Why do VoIP WGs, and
especially the SIP-related ones need to define specialized protocols for
each purpose and application rather than looking around for using existing
protocols and languages? Sometimes it looks to me like SIP tries to
re-invent every wheel already turning in the IETF. Do we really need XCAP
and XCON when we have NETCONF and WebDAV?

... yes, I know this may not be a popular view either :-)

Regards,

Dan

--
!! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
!! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or
adjust !! your settings, send a mail message to
<[email-masked]> !! or look at
https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 07:55:45 -0500
To: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, "Cullen Jennings" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management
Cc: [email-masked]

Personally, I think that this is a really interesting question...

Put another way, does VOIP infrastructure really differ enough from 
IP infrastructure that they need their own configuration protocols? 
If so, what is different about it that makes network configuration 
protocols inadequate?  Could we modify/extend existing network 
configuration protocols to make them more useful for VOIP?

Margaret

At 2:14 PM +0200 2/21/05, Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\) wrote:
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C5180E.DED98ED6"

Let me stir a little bit more the pot and raise another item that I 
believe is worth being discussed in the projected workshop. Why do 
VoIP WGs, and especially the SIP-related ones need to define 
specialized protocols for each purpose and application rather than 
looking around for using existing protocols and languages? Sometimes 
it looks to me like SIP tries to re-invent every wheel already 
turning in the IETF. Do we really need XCAP and XCON when we have 
NETCONF and WebDAV?

... yes, I know this may not be a popular view either :-)

Regards,

Dan

--
!! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
!! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or adjust
!! your settings, send a mail message to <[email-masked]>
!! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.

content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:24:19 +0200
From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
To: "Alan Clark" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]

Alan,

As you know I am a supporter of a VoIP performance management framework for quite a while. Actually the Area Directors of the O&M and Transport Areas encouraged us to write an Internet-Draft defining such a framework. I do not know if there is work for such a document in other SDOs, but if there is not I would suggest that the timing may be right for such a document in the IETF, which may become a BCP RFC - maybe sponsored by the nmrg. 

I agree with all the general ideas that you are listing, I would just add a few points:

1. There is value in seeing VoIP traffic in the context of the general network behavior, especially with respect with Transport Performance Monitoring and Application Performance Monitoring. This is one point where RAQMON can help, integrated within the RMON family of protocols
2. VoIP QoS is not characterized only by media monitoring but also by session initiation and continuity metrics. Such parameters should be added to the list of metrics provided by RTCP-XR
3. The framework needs to deal with the issue of scalability, taking into account the large scale deployments typical to VoIP lately. Polling by SNMP would not scale beyond a certain limit, and this is were monitoring architecture like RAQMON can help with a collectors architecture that ensures data reduction and threshold-based reporting.  
4. The VoIP performance monitoring framework needs to take into consideration the issues of encrypted payload and signaling deployment, which will become more popular with the deployment of protocols like IPSec and SRTP. 

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Alan Clark
> Sent: 21 February, 2005 4:51 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
> 
> 
> 
> Dan
> 
> With regard to your suggestion of a VoIP performance 
> management framework -
> there is a body of work in that has been emerging over the 
> last several
> years.  This is based on the following general ideas:-
> 
> 1. As problems are often transient and can result from the 
> interaction of a
> number of different parameters then it makes sense to both 
> measure and do
> per-call correlation at key points within the network, notably at IP
> endpoints.  This has led to the development of lightweight 
> agents that can
> be integrated directly into IP endpoints, able to report 
> estimated call
> quality and supporting diagnostic data.
> 
> 2. It makes sense to define a single set of VoIP metrics and use this
> independently of the protocol used for reporting/ retrieval
> 
> 3. In order to understand some types of problem (e.g. echo) 
> it is desirable
> to exchange information between two IP endpoints.
> 
> 4. One model for retrieving data from IP phones and 
> residential gateways is
> to use a lightweight "push" model.  This should ideally be 
> signaling system
> independent and capable of penetrating firewall routers.
> 
> 5. By extending RTCP to carry a useful set of VoIP metrics 
> (2) then 3 and 4
> can be satisfied (i.e. RTCP XR)
> 
> 6. We need a MIB that supports retrieval of this set of VoIP 
> metrics (the
> RTCP XR MIB draft)
> 
> 7. To support service management it is desirable to also 
> report through the
> signaling system, to allow call quality metrics to be 
> incorporated in call
> detail records.  There are now published ITU standards for 
> H.323 and Megaco
> and IETF drafts for SIP and MGCP to support the transmission 
> of the same set
> of metrics through the signaling system.
> 
> This model has been adopted by the US Cable Industry as the 
> VoIP performance
> management architecture for PacketCable 1.5, and hence has 
> been shown to
> work in at least one environment.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Alan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 11:28 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
> 
> 
> Juergen,
> 
> Here are a few issues I encountered in the VoIP management 
> space in the last
> few years, and which may be items for such a workshop:
> 
> 1. 'Generic' IP management protocols (SNMP, NETCONF, WebDAV) vs.
> 'specialized' IP telephony and IP telephony applications configuration
> protocols (XCCAP, XCON, etc.)
> 
> 2. Configuration management and provisioning:
> - centralized (IP PBX, media servers) and distributed devices 
> (gateways and
> IP phones) configuration
> - provisioning architectures and protocols in service providers and
> enterprise (large, small) deployments
> 
> 3. VoIP Performance management
> - work on a common performance management framework for VoIP
> - combined use of IP telephony control protocols (RTCP, SIP) and SNMP
> - protocols used for VoIP performance monitoring RTCP-XR, 
> RAQMON, NetFlow,
> etc.
> - passive vs. active (synthetic sources)
> 
> 4. Faults Management
> -  ITU Alarm Information model as described in ITU 
> Recommendation M.3100,
> X.733, X.736 and RFC 3877
> 
> 5. Topology management extensions for IP telephony
> - TR 41.1 Link Layer Discovery Protocol for Media Endpoint Devices
> (LLDP-MED)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Sent: 18 February, 2005 12:51 PM
> > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> > Cc: [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:47:13PM +0200, Romascanu, Dan 
> (Dan) wrote:
> >
> > > If you are interested I can prepare a list of issues which
> > I believe
> > > are of interest in VoIP management.
> >
> > I am certainly interest in such a list of issues. Feel free to post
> > something to this mailing list. Perhaps we can collect and organize
> > things as we go forward planning such a workshop.
> >
> > /js
> >
> > --
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International 
> University Bremen
> > <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561,
> > 28725 Bremen, Germany
> >
> 
> --
> !! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To 
> unsubscribe or
> adjust
> !! your settings, send a mail message to 
> <[email-masked]>
> !! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.
> 
> -- 
> !! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To 
> unsubscribe or adjust
> !! your settings, send a mail message to 
> <[email-masked]>
> !! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.
> 

From: "Alan Clark" <[email-masked]>
To: "Dan Romascanu \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:50:47 -0500
Importance: Normal
Cc: [email-masked]

Dan

With regard to your suggestion of a VoIP performance management framework -
there is a body of work in that has been emerging over the last several
years.  This is based on the following general ideas:-

1. As problems are often transient and can result from the interaction of a
number of different parameters then it makes sense to both measure and do
per-call correlation at key points within the network, notably at IP
endpoints.  This has led to the development of lightweight agents that can
be integrated directly into IP endpoints, able to report estimated call
quality and supporting diagnostic data.

2. It makes sense to define a single set of VoIP metrics and use this
independently of the protocol used for reporting/ retrieval

3. In order to understand some types of problem (e.g. echo) it is desirable
to exchange information between two IP endpoints.

4. One model for retrieving data from IP phones and residential gateways is
to use a lightweight "push" model.  This should ideally be signaling system
independent and capable of penetrating firewall routers.

5. By extending RTCP to carry a useful set of VoIP metrics (2) then 3 and 4
can be satisfied (i.e. RTCP XR)

6. We need a MIB that supports retrieval of this set of VoIP metrics (the
RTCP XR MIB draft)

7. To support service management it is desirable to also report through the
signaling system, to allow call quality metrics to be incorporated in call
detail records.  There are now published ITU standards for H.323 and Megaco
and IETF drafts for SIP and MGCP to support the transmission of the same set
of metrics through the signaling system.

This model has been adopted by the US Cable Industry as the VoIP performance
management architecture for PacketCable 1.5, and hence has been shown to
work in at least one environment.

Regards

Alan

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 11:28 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management

Juergen,

Here are a few issues I encountered in the VoIP management space in the last
few years, and which may be items for such a workshop:

1. 'Generic' IP management protocols (SNMP, NETCONF, WebDAV) vs.
'specialized' IP telephony and IP telephony applications configuration
protocols (XCCAP, XCON, etc.)

2. Configuration management and provisioning:
- centralized (IP PBX, media servers) and distributed devices (gateways and
IP phones) configuration
- provisioning architectures and protocols in service providers and
enterprise (large, small) deployments

3. VoIP Performance management
- work on a common performance management framework for VoIP
- combined use of IP telephony control protocols (RTCP, SIP) and SNMP
- protocols used for VoIP performance monitoring RTCP-XR, RAQMON, NetFlow,
etc.
- passive vs. active (synthetic sources)

4. Faults Management
-  ITU Alarm Information model as described in ITU Recommendation M.3100,
X.733, X.736 and RFC 3877

5. Topology management extensions for IP telephony
- TR 41.1 Link Layer Discovery Protocol for Media Endpoint Devices
(LLDP-MED)

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 18 February, 2005 12:51 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:47:13PM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
>
> > If you are interested I can prepare a list of issues which
> I believe
> > are of interest in VoIP management.
>
> I am certainly interest in such a list of issues. Feel free to post
> something to this mailing list. Perhaps we can collect and organize
> things as we go forward planning such a workshop.
>
> /js
>
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561,
> 28725 Bremen, Germany
>

--
!! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
!! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or
adjust
!! your settings, send a mail message to <[email-masked]>
!! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.

content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 14:14:19 +0200
From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, "Cullen Jennings" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [nmrg] another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip management

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5180E.DED98ED6
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="windows-1255"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Let me stir a little bit more the pot and raise another item that I =
believe is worth being discussed in the projected workshop. Why do VoIP =
WGs, and especially the SIP-related ones need to define specialized =
protocols for each purpose and application rather than looking around =
for using existing protocols and languages? Sometimes it looks to me =
like SIP tries to re-invent every wheel already turning in the IETF. Do =
we really need XCAP and XCON when we have NETCONF and WebDAV?=20

... yes, I know this may not be a popular view either :-)

Regards,

Dan

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5180E.DED98ED6
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="windows-1255"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1255">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.0.6603.0">
<TITLE>another possible subject for the nmrg workshop on voip =
management</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->

<P DIR=3DLTR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Let me stir a little bit more =
the pot and raise another item that I believe is worth being discussed =
in the projected workshop. Why do VoIP WGs, and especially the =
SIP-related ones need to define specialized protocols for each purpose =
and application rather than looking around for using existing protocols =
and languages? Sometimes it looks to me like SIP tries to re-invent =
every wheel already turning in the IETF. Do we really need XCAP and XCON =
when we have NETCONF and WebDAV? </FONT></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">... yes, I know this may not =
be a popular view either :-)</FONT></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Regards,</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"en-us"><FONT SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Dan</FONT></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"he"></SPAN></P>

<P DIR=3DLTR><SPAN LANG=3D"he"></SPAN></P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C5180E.DED98ED6--

content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:28:04 +0200
From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]

Juergen,

Here are a few issues I encountered in the VoIP management space in the last few years, and which may be items for such a workshop:

1. 'Generic' IP management protocols (SNMP, NETCONF, WebDAV) vs. 'specialized' IP telephony and IP telephony applications configuration protocols (XCCAP, XCON, etc.)

2. Configuration management and provisioning:
- centralized (IP PBX, media servers) and distributed devices (gateways and IP phones) configuration
- provisioning architectures and protocols in service providers and enterprise (large, small) deployments

3. VoIP Performance management
- work on a common performance management framework for VoIP
- combined use of IP telephony control protocols (RTCP, SIP) and SNMP
- protocols used for VoIP performance monitoring RTCP-XR, RAQMON, NetFlow, etc.
- passive vs. active (synthetic sources)

4. Faults Management 
-  ITU Alarm Information model as described in ITU Recommendation M.3100, X.733, X.736 and RFC 3877

5. Topology management extensions for IP telephony 
- TR 41.1 Link Layer Discovery Protocol for Media Endpoint Devices (LLDP-MED)

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 18 February, 2005 12:51 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:47:13PM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> 
> > If you are interested I can prepare a list of issues which 
> I believe 
> > are of interest in VoIP management.  
> 
> I am certainly interest in such a list of issues. Feel free to post 
> something to this mailing list. Perhaps we can collect and organize 
> things as we go forward planning such a workshop.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 
> 28725 Bremen, Germany
> 

Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 14:27:08 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: Carmen Guerrero <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Mail-Followup-To: Carmen Guerrero <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 07:15:36PM +0100, Carmen Guerrero wrote:
 
> I think this topic is quite interesting. My suggestion is to relate IMS (IP
> Multimedia Subsystem) to network management. Now I am involved in IMS, SIP
> research and I have a strong research background in network management, so I
> am trying to joint this two topics in teaching and researching.

What is your definition of IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem)? How does that
differ from VoIP?
 
> If you need more information or collaboration in this topic I would be very
> grateful in being involved.
> 
> What kind of workshop are you thinking about?

Invite people who do management products in the VoIP space and people who
run larger VoIP services to figure out what the management challenges of
VoIP are. As usual, we are interested in real technical discussions of
the subject.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:03:49 +0100
From: Olivier Festor <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Cc: [email-masked]

Interest : YES, YES, YES.

People : I'll start to investigate in France.

/Olivier

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:

>I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
>on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
>are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
>technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
>management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.
>
>At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
>two questions:
>
>a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
>
>b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>   issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
>
>I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I need your
>help to get the right people together and I need strong indications
>that there is enough interest to justify time investment.
>
>/js
>
>  
>

From: Keith McCloghrie <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
To: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 11:28:41 -0800 (PST)
Cc: [email-masked], Azita Kia <[email-masked]>

Juergen/Alex,

I forwarded Juergen's original message to a few other folks in Cisco,
and Azita Kia (I've cc-ed her on this message) who has done quite a 
bit of work on VoIP management, is interested in participating in
the workshop.

Keith.

>
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 10:29:04AM -0800, Alexander Clemm wrote:
>  
> > I have worked myself on VoIP management and large scale deployments thereof 
> > for many years, although not most recently.  Most of this was in the 
> > service provider and managed service provider space.  I would be willing to 
> > share some of the challenges and issues that I have seen, along with 
> > approaches that can be used to address them.  I could also try and see if I 
> > could find someone in Cisco to specifically address the networking and 
> > control side, if there is an interest.
> 
> Great. Let me know who from Cisco can give us insight into the problem
> domain and perhaps explain in one or two paragraphs the specifics. I
> will collect info and then we can see how to organize the logistics.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany
> -- 
> !! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or adjust
> !! your settings, send a mail message to <[email-masked]>
> !! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.
> 

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 19:57:06 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: Alexander Clemm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Mail-Followup-To: Alexander Clemm <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 10:29:04AM -0800, Alexander Clemm wrote:
 
> I have worked myself on VoIP management and large scale deployments thereof 
> for many years, although not most recently.  Most of this was in the 
> service provider and managed service provider space.  I would be willing to 
> share some of the challenges and issues that I have seen, along with 
> approaches that can be used to address them.  I could also try and see if I 
> could find someone in Cisco to specifically address the networking and 
> control side, if there is an interest.

Great. Let me know who from Cisco can give us insight into the problem
domain and perhaps explain in one or two paragraphs the specifics. I
will collect info and then we can see how to organize the logistics.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 19:52:56 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: "Prof. J. Won-Ki Hong" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Mail-Followup-To: "Prof. J. Won-Ki Hong" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 12:02:31AM +0900, Prof. J. Won-Ki Hong wrote:
 
> I am interested in such a workshop but I am afraid I can't suggest people
> at this point. When and where are you thinking of holding this workshop?

I first want to see whether there is interest and if I can find the
right people. Once I know who the main contributors will be, I will
try to arrange a meeting place.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 10:29:04 -0800
To: [email-masked]
From: Alexander Clemm <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Cc: [email-masked]

Hello Juergen,

I think such a workshop would be very interesting and topical.

I have worked myself on VoIP management and large scale deployments thereof 
for many years, although not most recently.  Most of this was in the 
service provider and managed service provider space.  I would be willing to 
share some of the challenges and issues that I have seen, along with 
approaches that can be used to address them.  I could also try and see if I 
could find someone in Cisco to specifically address the networking and 
control side, if there is an interest.

--- Alex

At 10:33 AM 2/18/2005 +0100, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
>on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
>are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
>technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
>management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.
>
>At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
>two questions:
>
>a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
>
>b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>    issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
>
>I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I need your
>help to get the right people together and I need strong indications
>that there is enough interest to justify time investment.
>
>/js
>
>--
>Juergen Schoenwaelder               International University Bremen
><http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>     P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany
>--
>!! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
>!! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or 
>adjust
>!! your settings, send a mail message to <[email-masked]>
>!! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.

From: "Carmen Guerrero" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 19:15:36 +0100
Organization: UC3M
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hello,

I think this topic is quite interesting. My suggestion is to relate IMS (IP
Multimedia Subsystem) to network management. Now I am involved in IMS, SIP
research and I have a strong research background in network management, so I
am trying to joint this two topics in teaching and researching.

If you need more information or collaboration in this topic I would be very
grateful in being involved.

What kind of workshop are you thinking about?

Kind Regards

Carmen Guerrero

Dra. Carmen Guerrero López
Univ. Carlos III of Madrid
Avda. de la Universidad, 30
28911 Leganes (Madrid) ESPAÑA
Tel: +34 91 6248745
Fax: +34 91 6248749
Email: [email-masked]
Web: www.it.uc3m.es/carmen

-----Mensaje original-----
De: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] En
nombre de Prof. J. Won-Ki Hong
Enviado el: viernes, 18 de febrero de 2005 16:03
Para: [email-masked]
Asunto: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management

Juergen,

I am interested in such a workshop but I am afraid I can't suggest people
at this point. When and where are you thinking of holding this workshop?

Cheers!

James

On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 10:33:57AM +0100, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
> on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
> are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
> technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
> management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.
> 
> At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
> two questions:
> 
> a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
> 
> b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>    issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
> 
> I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I need your
> help to get the right people together and I need strong indications
> that there is enough interest to justify time investment.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder      International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>     P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen,
Germany
> -- 
> !! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or
adjust
> !! your settings, send a mail message to <[email-masked]>
> !! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Won-Ki Hong, PhD, Associate Professor
Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering, POSTECH, Pohang Korea 790-784
Currently visiting Dept. of ECE, U. of Toronto, Canada (Sep/2004-Aug/2005)
Tel: +1-416-222-3558 (H), +1-416-946-0545 (O),  Mobile: +1-647-284-0349
Email: [email-masked]        http://dpnm.postech.ac.kr/~jwkhong/
IEEE ComSoc CNOM Vice Chair: http://www.comsoc.org/~cnomwww/
IEEE ComSoc Director of Online Content:
http://www.comsoc.org/socstr/org/bog/officers/2004/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
!! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
!! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or
adjust
!! your settings, send a mail message to <[email-masked]>
!! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.

Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 00:02:31 +0900
From: "Prof. J. Won-Ki Hong" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management

Juergen,

I am interested in such a workshop but I am afraid I can't suggest people
at this point. When and where are you thinking of holding this workshop?

Cheers!

James

On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 10:33:57AM +0100, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
> on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
> are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
> technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
> management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.
> 
> At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
> two questions:
> 
> a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
> 
> b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>    issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
> 
> I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I need your
> help to get the right people together and I need strong indications
> that there is enough interest to justify time investment.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder      International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>     P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany
> -- 
> !! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or adjust
> !! your settings, send a mail message to <[email-masked]>
> !! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Won-Ki Hong, PhD, Associate Professor
Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering, POSTECH, Pohang Korea 790-784
Currently visiting Dept. of ECE, U. of Toronto, Canada (Sep/2004-Aug/2005)
Tel: +1-416-222-3558 (H), +1-416-946-0545 (O),  Mobile: +1-647-284-0349
Email: [email-masked]        http://dpnm.postech.ac.kr/~jwkhong/
IEEE ComSoc CNOM Vice Chair: http://www.comsoc.org/~cnomwww/
IEEE ComSoc Director of Online Content:
http://www.comsoc.org/socstr/org/bog/officers/2004/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:47:58 +0100
From: Luca Deri <[email-masked]>
Organization: ntop.org
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Cc: [email-masked]

Juergen,
I believe that your proposal makes sense, a lot of sense. I'm a VoIP 
user not a field expert, so I'm interested in its monitoring more than 
on the technology per-se.

What I can tell you is that I have received many emails from ntop users 
that are also willing to see from ntop some figures about VoIP. 
Currently Cisco Skinny+RTP (that's the mostly used standard VoIP 
solution on the market) is supported (jitter + packet loss) and I'm 
investigating what can be done with SIP. I have also improved my NetFlow 
v9 probe (http://www.ntop.org/nProbe.html) with some additional IDs for 
sending via NFv9 this information. Other people asked me to add smarted 
decoders so that it is also possible to detect the phone call quality 
(as well export this info into NFv9), but in order to do this I need to 
do some more work.

Cheers, Luca

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:

>I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
>on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
>are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
>technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
>management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.
>
>At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
>two questions:
>
>a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
>
>b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>   issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
>
>I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I need your
>help to get the right people together and I need strong indications
>that there is enough interest to justify time investment.
>
>/js
>
>  
>

-- 
Luca Deri <[email-masked]>	http://luca.ntop.org/
Hacker: someone who loves to program and enjoys being
clever about it - Richard Stallman

X-Antivirus-cse.iitb.ac.in-Mail-From: [email-masked] via jeeves.cse.iitb.ac.in
X-Antivirus-cse.iitb.ac.in: 1.22-st-qms (Clear:RC:1(10.105.1.11):. Processed in 0.623359 secs Process 29940)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:04:11 +0530 (IST)
From: Sudeep Goyal <[email-masked]>
To: Aiko Pras <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Cc: [email-masked]

I am also definitely interested in such a workshop. Though time is 
pretty constraint as of now.

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Aiko Pras wrote:

>
>
> Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>> I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
>> on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
>> are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
>> technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
>> management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.
>> 
>> At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
>> two questions:
>> 
>> a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
> Yes
>> 
>> b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>>    issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
> Not realy (I have a student working at a small VoIP company; I don't except 
> the owner of that company would be interested to join our meeting).
>
> Bye
>
> Aiko
>
>

-- 

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:05:47 +0100
From: "Marcus Brunner" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Cc: 

Juergen,

I think it is a good idea. 
I will try to some names together in that area.

Marcus

---------------------------------------------------

Dr. Marcus Brunner
Network Laboratories
NEC Europe Ltd.

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Juergen 
> Schoenwaelder
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 10:34 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
> 
> I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop 
> focussing on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to 
> invite people who are on the forefront of the implementation 
> and deployment of VoIP technology in order to kick off a 
> discussion what the specific management issues related to 
> large scale VoIP services are.
> 
> At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the 
> following two questions:
> 
> a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
> 
> b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>    issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
> 
> I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I 
> need your help to get the right people together and I need 
> strong indications that there is enough interest to justify 
> time investment.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 
> 28725 Bremen, Germany
> --
> !! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To 
> unsubscribe or adjust !! your settings, send a mail message 
> to <[email-masked]> !! or look at 
> https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.
> 

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:02:46 +0100
From: Aiko Pras <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
> on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
> are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
> technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
> management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.
> 
> At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
> two questions:
> 
> a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
Yes
> 
> b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>    issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
Not realy (I have a student working at a small VoIP company; I don't 
except the owner of that company would be interested to join our meeting).

Bye

Aiko

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 11:50:46 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Mail-Followup-To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:47:13PM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:

> If you are interested I can prepare a list of issues which I believe 
> are of interest in VoIP management.  

I am certainly interest in such a list of issues. Feel free to post 
something to this mailing list. Perhaps we can collect and organize 
things as we go forward planning such a workshop.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:47:13 +0200
From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Cc: 

Juergen,

a) I would be very interested in such a workshop - it's exactly in the focus of what I am doing nowadays. 

b) I believe that distributing this query to the lists of the WG involved in VoIP would get you a number of answers from the persons involved in VoIP management and deployment. - I would try avt, mmusic, sip, sipping, simple, ecrit

If you are interested I can prepare a list of issues which I believe are of interest in VoIP management.  

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Juergen 
> Schoenwaelder
> Sent: 18 February, 2005 11:34 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
> 
> 
> I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
> on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
> are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
> technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
> management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.
> 
> At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
> two questions:
> 
> a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?
> 
> b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
>    issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?
> 
> I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I need your
> help to get the right people together and I need strong indications
> that there is enough interest to justify time investment.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
> <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 
> 28725 Bremen, Germany
> -- 
> !! This message is brought to you via the `nmrg' mailing list.
> !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To 
> unsubscribe or adjust
> !! your settings, send a mail message to 
> <[email-masked]>
> !! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/nmrg.
> 

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 10:33:57 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Mail-Followup-To: [email-masked]
Subject: [nmrg] nmrg workshop on voip management
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I am toying with the idea to organize an NMRG workshop focussing
on VoIP management issues. The idea would be to invite people who
are on the forefront of the implementation and deployment of VoIP
technology in order to kick off a discussion what the specific
management issues related to large scale VoIP services are.

At this point in time, I would like to receive back on the following
two questions:

a) Is there general interest to have such a workshop?

b) Do you have any suggestions for people working on VoIP management
   issues or deployment issues that should be contacted / invited?

I willing to spend cycles to organize such an event. But I need your
help to get the right people together and I need strong indications
that there is enough interest to justify time investment.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:29:48 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: Michael Kirkham <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: Michael Kirkham <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: [nmrg] Re: NMRG-SMING-SNMP-MAPPING (RFC 3781) errata
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 03:00:49AM -0800, Michael Kirkham wrote:

> While not technically a MIB module and possibly of no interest to anyone 
> given the SMIng working group (and I'm pretty sure the mailing list) shut 
> down, unless it restarts some day, this is probably the most appropriate 
> place to mention this too, short of the snmpv3 list.  (I'll forward this 
> and the other two MPLS MIB errata emails to the RFC editor as well.)
> 
> There are ASN.1 syntax errors on all but one of the type definitions 
> defined in NMRG-SMING-SNMP-MAPPING (missing "::=" operator):

[...]

Thanks for catching these. I agree to post these erratas for RFC 3781.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 18:35:18 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: Aiko Pras <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] Role of the IRTF
Mail-Followup-To: Aiko Pras <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 02:57:32PM +0100, Aiko Pras wrote:

> >The IAB's discussion on the future of the IRTF have led to a draft
> >which I think is quite interesting to read.
> >
> >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-irtf-00.txt
> 
> I've read it, but what was the interesting part ;-)

The interesting part was that you read it. 

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 14:57:32 +0100
From: Aiko Pras <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] Role of the IRTF
Cc: [email-masked]

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> The IAB's discussion on the future of the IRTF have led to a draft
> which I think is quite interesting to read.
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-irtf-00.txt

I've read it, but what was the interesting part ;-)

Aiko