Subject: [nmrg] draft utrecht meeting minutes
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:43:09 +0200
List-Id: Network Management Research Group <nmrg.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>

Hi,

I have compiled the draft minutes of the Utrecht meeting and put
the online:

  http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/projects/nmrg/minutes/minutes-021.txt

Please check the minutes and send me any corrections you find
important by November 10th. The minutes are rather detailed and we
clearly need to work through them to turn them into a more readable
summary.

/js

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

From: "David Harrington" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 13:24:50 +0200
Subject: [nmrg] Vendor Breakout Session.doc

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_02CB_01C6F44B.1FCC3900
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Vendor Breakout Session

 

== VENDORS (room 10) ==
 
Claudio Bartolini [V]
Petre Dini [V]
Liam Fallon [V]
Dan Romascanu [V]
David Harrington [V]
Giorgio Nunzi [V]
Bert Wijnen [V]
Jurgen Schonwalder [R]
 
== Questions ==
 
[V1] Is research still needed on new technologies to transport
     management information, or can we rely on generic protocols and
     middleware technologies (such as Corba, Java, Web Services etc)
     to transfer such information. If research is still needed, what
     are the specific problems these new technologies have to solve?

Discussion of vertical vs horizontal

            Distinction between device mgmt and upper-level protocols

Q: Is research needed on any of the 

A: taxonomy could benefit from standardization

A: SIP is reinventing mgmt - need to do end-to-end mgmt 

It would be useful to have documents discussing what you are likely to
get wrong when you design your own extensions to NM technologies.

Will web services work for NM?

Research design patterns for NM work?

Integration of what's in the market. Federation of spaghetti bowls is
difficult because there are no guidelines for how to do it.
 
Access control and identity mgmt - it has impacts on horizontal
sharing of device info.
 
DR: people do not know what protocols exist

[V2] Is research still needed on languages for data models and/or
     information models, or research on core data / information
models?
     If yes, what are the specific problems that need to be solved?

Li: It seems every researcher want to create new languages. 
DR: There is a need to build a model for mgmt.
Cl: language and data models do not exist, or do people not know that
they exist?
DR: people are being sent to use things like LDAP, but the specific
language does not meet mgmt needs.
JS: are the languages wrong?
All: no, just different
Li: the models are not expressed in an understandable format.
BW: CF: data vs info models - data models needed for device-to-device;
info is needed for humans to understand the concepts
Data models languages must be more interoperable; it will be harder
for operators to understand how to actually manage products using
different data models. I don't care as much at the info modeling level
about the formal design as long as it is capable of expressing the
ideas.
Pe: 
Cl: if I am starting to do a project, and want a survey of whether
concepts have been expressed, I will find lots of info described in
different approaches.
Pe: if the concepts are described differently but in the end the
concepts are the same, that is not a problem.
BW: I don't think we ca ever do a complete info model; I'm not too
worried about the info model. 
Pe: this is a never-ending topic to develop a full model, but it will
never be achieved.
JS: it can be possible to document some common stuff, 
Li: but at the last step, the last 5% never gets right.
Pe: there are multiple well-documented info models, but they tend to
be narrow scope of info (e.g. mission-critical software designs)
Gi: one thing missing is the modeling has been done in separate areas.
Info modeling has not been done in mgmt systems. Voip mgmt, etc. are
not integrated into a full system. What is missing is the integration
of mgmt solutions into a product where the pieces need to be
integrated. There are good reasons to develop new info/data models,
but consideration should be given to integrating with existing models.
Li: maybe we don't need models but a framework within which to do
modeling. The device-to-EMS and device-to-device communications should
use a similar modeling.
BW: that's a bottom-up approach compared to CIM/etc that do a top-down
approach.
DR: anything that has "universal" is suspect.
 
Pe: from a bottom-up approach, how does a device know how to express
the mgmt of features that are to be utilized by  service providers
(NMS above the EMS level)? What is needed in a box to operate the box
(as compared to manage the box). 
 
DH: as we discuss what needs to be researched, I think we need to look
at types of research and the timeframes they are associated with.
Universities need to research the more theoretical issues, while
vendors need to research more practical and immediately applicable
research for products.
 
Summary: skeptical about defining an info model to generate data
models. Research on a universal info model isn't very needed.

 
[V3] Is the current approach where devices have hundreds of MIB
     modules and many thousands of MIB objects, the right one, or do
     we need something else? If yes, which approaches are considered
     promising (programmable devices, high-level network element
     management functions integrated on devices, document-oriented
     approaches, ...)?
 
Pe: what is already defined is not being implemented. Standard MIBs
are agreed upon, but they are not implemented throughout the product,
or across product lines, and are not implemented accurately. Are there
other approaches needed? Nobody complains that this is wrong, only
that it is not completely implemented.
BW: do we think it is because customers 
Pe: complaints come from others' customers where the functionality is
missing.
Cl: is the effort of mib modeling related to what customers
experience? It takes a lot of effort to implement mib modules, would
it be best to link those things to the requirements? Which information
is important to certain management functionality?
 
There is little published info about what functionality is actually
enabled when a specific MIB is implemented. It is very unclear what
functionality applications will provide if a given MIB is available.
 
Li: 3GPP resource models specify quite clearly how to do
configuration. When config is done, an XML blob is sent to the device,
and the device applies it to the element.
 
DR: vendors seem to be doing SNMP support; vendors put their effort
where the money is.
Pe: engineering is based on meeting requirements. 
Cl: if 
Li: highly-detailed MIBs are not easy to work with.
BW: SNMPCONF had the ability to write scripts and send them to the
device to perform policy-based 
JS: Once customers can touch the box internally, it becomes a support
problem for the vendor.
BW,JS: some want to develop scripts but not touch the internals; 

[V4] What is needed to make a system manageable? What is in particular
     difficult or expensive from a device / system vendor point of
     view?
 
Pe: this requires a book. 
BW: making a device manageable is different than what is need to make
a system manageable.
Pe: on the device, mgmt is local. Once you go beyond this, it becomes
complicated.
JS: Could this book be written in five years?
Pe: what is the target? If a system is designed without mgmt in mind,
it will not be manageable. You need some feature inside that permit
this manageability.
DR: it is even deeper; protocols need to be designed for
manageability. 
Pe: what is need for protocols to be managed for system usage? 
BW: and if you're not careful, multiple devices need to managed using
different protocols and different data models, and they need to work
together in a system, then you have a problem.
DR: maybe the IETF needs to play more stronger in enforcing this.
BW: what mgmt is being used for service management vs device mgmt. 
Pe: is clock sync a requirement for system manageability?
DR: if a protocol is designed to stateful, do states need to be
observable externally?
Pe: does a system need to be testable? If so, what must be visible?
BW: loopback, rollback, diffserv, ping, continuity, etc.
Pe: it become important doing correlation tracking whether a reporting
device has a clock or not, how much skew might exist, etc. For some
systems this is a must.

[V5] How do you monitor research and capitalize research results?
 
Pe: Juergen, how does the research community in Europe decide which
projects should be done, and ow do they coordinate the many research
topics to focus research, and make the results available?
JS: the EU is a political org, and decisions are mad eon political
basis.
Cl: how does Emanics do this?
JS: political thing.
Cl: what types of deliverables 
Pe: I see two big outputs. If big corp is starting the project and
embracing a particular result, how does it impact the economy? If
students start-up new theoretical projects, 
 
Pe: Cisco monitors startups, invests in them, and acquires them
Cl: HP is more likely to acquire research than to utilize internal
research.
BW: IBM also focuses on patents, Nobel prizes, prestige, etc.
JS: if you want to measure what is happening outside
Pe: most of my time is studying external research.
BW: they look at individuals with the capability of being Nobel prize
winners, etc.
Cl: the Microsoft model acquires companies and that becomes a research
division
BW: research has become too commercial. They want it to be more
applied research. With budget cuts, depts. Need to justify their work.
Gi: competencies are established in research depts.; some results are
useful. 
Li: some results are good; some are very good. Use case research works
quite well.
Gi: technology transfer
Li: 

[V6] Is probabilistic management feasible?

 
[V7] What SLA related research is needed? Do we need them and for
what?

 
[V8] What are the three most important research questions to be
     addressed in the next five years from a vendor perspective?

DH: 1) what new products are needed? 2) which new markets can we move
into? 3) how can we reduce costs?

DR: what network management technologies 

Cl: cost control is an important area for research - what mgmt
technologies can help to reduce Opex and CapEx?

Pe: strategic decisions are not outsourced. In general, research is an
appendix for exploring things outside the core competitive core.

Pe: companies have maps of which MIBs are important for managing
functionality. They just are not public.

Pe: research is exploration. 

Gi: if we want to add new value, that is research.

Li: how do you manage services across different product types?

Three top questions:

Gi: programmability for self-mgmt

DR: requirements for protocols and requirements for data models

All: Access control and identity mgmt and audit trails - it has
impacts on horizontal sharing of device info.

------=_NextPart_000_02CB_01C6F44B.1FCC3900
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>

<head>
<meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11 (filtered)">
<title>Vendor Breakout Session</title>

<style>
<!--
 /* Style Definitions */
 p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman";}
h2
	{margin-top:12.0pt;
	margin-right:0in;
	margin-bottom:3.0pt;
	margin-left:0in;
	page-break-after:avoid;
	font-size:14.0pt;
	font-family:Arial;
	font-style:italic;}
pre
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:10.0pt;
	font-family:"Courier New";}
@page Section1
	{size:595.3pt 841.9pt;
	margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
	{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>

</head>

<body lang=3DEN-US>

<div class=3DSection1>

<h2><b><i><font size=3D4 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:14.0pt'>Vendor
Breakout Session</span></font></i></b></h2>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></p>

<pre><font size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>=3D=3D VENDORS (room 10) =
=3D=3D</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Claudio =
Bartolini [V]</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Petre =
Dini [V]</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Liam =
Fallon [V]</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Dan =
Romascanu [V]</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>David =
Harrington [V]</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span lang=3DDE =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Giorgio Nunzi =
[V]</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span lang=3DDE =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Bert Wijnen [V]</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Jurgen =
Schonwalder [R]</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>=3D=3D =
Questions =3D=3D</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>[V1] Is research still =
needed on new technologies to =
transport</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
management information, or can we rely on generic protocols =
and</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
middleware technologies (such as Corba, Java, Web Services =
etc)</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; to =
transfer such information. If research is still needed, =
what</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; are =
the specific problems these new technologies have to =
solve?</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Discussion of vertical vs horizontal</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
; Distinction
between device mgmt and upper-level protocols</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Q: Is research needed on any of the </span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>A: taxonomy could benefit from standardization</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>A: SIP is reinventing mgmt &#8211; need to do end-to-end mgmt =
</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>It would be useful to have documents discussing what you are =
likely to
get wrong when you design your own extensions to NM =
technologies.</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Will web services work for NM?</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Research design patterns for NM work?</span></font></p>

<pre><font size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Integration of what&#8217;s in the market. =
Federation of spaghetti bowls is difficult because there are no =
guidelines for how to do it.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Access =
control and identity mgmt &#8211; it has impacts on horizontal sharing =
of device info.</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DR: =
people do not know what protocols exist</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>[V2] Is research still =
needed on languages for data models =
and/or</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
information models, or research on core data / information =
models?</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If =
yes, what are the specific problems that need to be =
solved?</span></font></b></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Li: It =
seems every researcher want to create new languages. =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DR: There =
is a need to build a model for mgmt.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Cl: =
language and data models do not exist, or do people not know that they =
exist?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DR: =
people are being sent to use things like LDAP, but the specific language =
does not meet mgmt needs.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>JS: are =
the languages wrong?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>All: no, =
just different</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Li: the =
models are not expressed in an understandable =
format.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: CF: =
data vs info models &#8211; data models needed for device-to-device; =
info is needed for humans to understand the =
concepts</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Data =
models languages must be more interoperable; it will be harder for =
operators to understand how to actually manage products using different =
data models. I don&#8217;t care as much at the info modeling level about =
the formal design as long as it is capable of expressing the =
ideas.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Cl: if I =
am starting to do a project, and want a survey of whether concepts have =
been expressed, I will find lots of info described in different =
approaches.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: if =
the concepts are described differently but in the end the concepts are =
the same, that is not a problem.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: I =
don&#8217;t think we ca ever do a complete info model; I&#8217;m not too =
worried about the info model. </span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: this =
is a never-ending topic to develop a full model, but it will never be =
achieved.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>JS: it =
can be possible to document some common stuff, =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Li: but =
at the last step, the last 5% never gets =
right.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: there =
are multiple well-documented info models, but they tend to be narrow =
scope of info (e.g. mission-critical software =
designs)</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Gi: one =
thing missing is the modeling has been done in separate areas. Info =
modeling has not been done in mgmt systems. Voip mgmt, etc. are not =
integrated into a full system. What is missing is the integration of =
mgmt solutions into a product where the pieces need to be integrated. =
There are good reasons to develop new info/data models, but =
consideration should be given to integrating with existing =
models.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Li: maybe =
we don&#8217;t need models but a framework within which to do modeling. =
The device-to-EMS and device-to-device communications should use a =
similar modeling.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: =
that&#8217;s a bottom-up approach compared to CIM/etc that do a top-down =
approach.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DR: =
anything that has &#8220;universal&#8221; is =
suspect.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: from =
a bottom-up approach, how does a device know how to express the mgmt of =
features that are to be utilized by&nbsp; service providers (NMS above =
the EMS level)? What is needed in a box to operate the box (as compared =
to manage the box). </span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DH: as we =
discuss what needs to be researched, I think we need to look at types of =
research and the timeframes they are associated with. Universities need =
to research the more theoretical issues, while vendors need to research =
more practical and immediately applicable research for =
products.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Summary: =
skeptical about defining an info model to generate data models. Research =
on a universal info model isn&#8217;t very =
needed.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>[V3] Is the current approach =
where devices have hundreds of MIB</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
modules and many thousands of MIB objects, the right one, or =
do</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; we =
need something else? If yes, which approaches are =
considered</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
promising (programmable devices, high-level network =
element</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
management functions integrated on devices, =
document-oriented</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
approaches, ...)?</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>Pe: </span></font></b>what =
is already defined is not being implemented. Standard MIBs are agreed =
upon, but they are not implemented throughout the product, or across =
product lines, and are not implemented accurately. Are there other =
approaches needed? Nobody complains that this is wrong, only that it is =
not completely implemented.</pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: do we =
think it is because customers </span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: =
complaints come from others&#8217; customers where the functionality is =
missing.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Cl: is =
the effort of mib modeling related to what customers experience? It =
takes a lot of effort to implement mib modules, would it be best to link =
those things to the requirements? Which information is important to =
certain management functionality?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>There is =
little published info about what functionality is actually enabled when =
a specific MIB is implemented. It is very unclear what functionality =
applications will provide if a given MIB is =
available.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Li: 3GPP =
resource models specify quite clearly how to do configuration. When =
config is done, an XML blob is sent to the device, and the device =
applies it to the element.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DR: =
vendors seem to be doing SNMP support; vendors put their effort where =
the money is.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: =
engineering is based on meeting requirements. =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Cl: if =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Li: =
highly-detailed MIBs are not easy to work =
with.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: =
SNMPCONF had the ability to write scripts and send them to the device to =
perform policy-based </span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>JS: Once =
customers can touch the box internally, it becomes a support problem for =
the vendor.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW,JS: =
some want to develop scripts but not touch the internals; =
</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>[V4] What is needed to make =
a system manageable? What is in =
particular</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
difficult or expensive from a device / system vendor point =
of</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
view?</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: this =
requires a book. </span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: =
making a device manageable is different than what is need to make a =
system manageable.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: on =
the device, mgmt is local. Once you go beyond this, it becomes =
complicated.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>JS: Could =
this book be written in five years?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: what =
is the target? If a system is designed without mgmt in mind, it will not =
be manageable. You need some feature inside that permit this =
manageability.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DR: it is =
even deeper; protocols need to be designed for manageability. =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: what =
is need for protocols to be managed for system usage? =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: and =
if you&#8217;re not careful, multiple devices need to managed using =
different protocols and different data models, and they need to work =
together in a system, then you have a =
problem.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DR: maybe =
the IETF needs to play more stronger in enforcing =
this.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: what =
mgmt is being used for service management vs device mgmt. =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: is =
clock sync a requirement for system =
manageability?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>DR: if a =
protocol is designed to stateful, do states need to be observable =
externally?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: does =
a system need to be testable? If so, what must be =
visible?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: =
loopback, rollback, diffserv, ping, continuity, =
etc.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: it =
become important doing correlation tracking whether a reporting device =
has a clock or not, how much skew might exist, etc. For some systems =
this is a must.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>[V5] How do you monitor =
research and capitalize research =
results?</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: =
Juergen, how does the research community in Europe decide which projects =
should be done, and ow do they coordinate the many research topics to =
focus research, and make the results =
available?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>JS: the =
EU is a political org, and decisions are mad eon political =
basis.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Cl: how =
does Emanics do this?</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>JS: =
political thing.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Cl: what =
types of deliverables </span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: I see =
two big outputs. If big corp is starting the project and embracing a =
particular result, how does it impact the economy? If students start-up =
new theoretical projects, </span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: Cisco =
monitors startups, invests in them, and acquires =
them</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Cl: HP is =
more likely to acquire research than to utilize internal =
research.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: IBM =
also focuses on patents, Nobel prizes, prestige, =
etc.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>JS: if =
you want to measure what is happening =
outside</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Pe: most =
of my time is studying external research.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: they =
look at individuals with the capability of being Nobel prize winners, =
etc.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Cl: the =
Microsoft model acquires companies and that becomes a research =
division</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>BW: =
research has become too commercial. They want it to be more applied =
research. With budget cuts, depts. Need to justify their =
work.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Gi: =
competencies are established in research depts.; some results are =
useful. </span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Li: some =
results are good; some are very good. Use case research works quite =
well.</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Gi: =
technology transfer</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>Li: =
</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>[V6] Is probabilistic =
management feasible?</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>[V7] What SLA related =
research is needed? Do we need them and for =
what?</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;</span></font></b></pre=
><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>[V8] What are the three most =
important research questions to be</span></font></b></pre><pre><b><font
size=3D2 face=3D"Courier New"><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
addressed in the next five years from a vendor =
perspective?</span></font></b></pre>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>DH: 1) what new products are needed? 2) which new markets can we =
move
into? 3) how can we reduce costs?</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>DR: what network management technologies </span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Cl: cost control is an important area for research &#8211; what =
mgmt
technologies can help to reduce Opex and CapEx?</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Pe: strategic decisions are not outsourced. In general, research =
is an
appendix for exploring things outside the core competitive =
core.</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Pe: companies have maps of which MIBs are important for managing
functionality. They just are not public.</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Pe: research is exploration. </span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Gi: if we want to add new value, that is =
research.</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Li: how do you manage services across different product =
types?</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Three top questions:</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>Gi: programmability for self-mgmt</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>DR: requirements for protocols and requirements for data =
models</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>All: Access control and identity mgmt and audit trails &#8211; =
it has
impacts on horizontal sharing of device info.</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;</span></font></p>

</div>

</body>

</html>

------=_NextPart_000_02CB_01C6F44B.1FCC3900--

From: "Jennifer Rexford" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 06:32:18 -0400
Organization: Princeton University
Subject: [nmrg] Workshop on Internet Network Management
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hi folks,

I thought the people on this list might be interested in the program of a
workshop on Internet network management that was held at SIGCOMM'06 in Pisa
last month.  See

  http://research.microsoft.com/~dmaltz/inm06/program.html

for details.

-- Jen

Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:23:38 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Mail-Followup-To: [email-masked]
Subject: [nmrg] workshop preparation
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hi,

the workshop is coming up soon and I am looking forward to be in
Utrecht and to see many of you person. A rough agenda has been posted
on the meeting web page a while ago.

On Thursday, we will give every participant some 10 minutes to explain
his/her research statement. We will provide a reader with all the
statements on paper so people can use the printouts to make notes or
mark questions. The idea of this first round is to explain and discuss
the submitted research statements so that we all understand them. It
is perfectly fine to do round this without prepared slides (in fact we
prefer to run this without slides in order to not loose a lot of time
with switching notebooks and stuff like that).

During the afternoon, we will break-out in smaller groups to address
specific questions. We (the organizers) will prepare some questions
for the various groups and I am sure more questions will come up when
we go through the position statements together.

On Friday, we will start with a short summary presentation produced by
the smaller groups and afterwards we will discuss the conclusions and
try to produce a kind of a research roadmap.

Have a safe trip to Utrecht!

/js

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

Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:05:37 +0200
From: Aiko Pras <[email-masked]>
To: David Harrington <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] Re: Nmrg meeting
Cc: 

Hi David

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 04:41:33PM -0400, David Harrington wrote:
>  
>> Will we be able to have a podcast of the NMRG meeting?
I didn't plan that. Since I expect quite some "unstructured" discussion, 
the creation of such podcast would require to have microphones for each 
participant.

> I assume it only makes sense
> to record parts of the meeting since a two day workshop podcast might
> exceed what human souls can reasonably handle. ;-)
I agree with that. Unless the podcast is used for people who, for some 
kind of disease, cannot get asleep. ;-)

Bye

Aiko

Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:02:13 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: David Harrington <[email-masked]>
Mail-Followup-To: David Harrington <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [nmrg] Re: Nmrg meeting
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 04:41:33PM -0400, David Harrington wrote:
 
> Will we be able to have a podcast of the NMRG meeting?

Aiko is our "master of podcasting" - so he will be able to comment on
the feasibility from the technical side. I assume it only makes sense
to record parts of the meeting since a two day workshop podcast might
exceed what human souls can reasonably handle. ;-)

/js

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

From: "David Harrington" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 16:41:33 -0400
Cc: 
Subject: [nmrg] Nmrg meeting

Hi,

Will we be able to have a podcast of the NMRG meeting?

David Harrington
[email-masked] 
[email-masked]
[email-masked]

Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 01:45:19 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Mail-Followup-To: [email-masked]
Subject: [nmrg] nmrg/emanics workshop position statements and agenda online
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hi,

I have linked the position statements I have received so far to the
meeting web page:

    http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/projects/nmrg/meetings/2006/utrecht/

I took the freedom to edit the texts so that they all share the same
plain ASCII format. If I screwed up your statement, please drop me a
note and I will fix things.

We (the organizers) like to invite you to read these statements and to
also post questions / comments on this list if you find statements
unclear or you have other thoughts on what you have read.

We have also just posted a draft agenda on the web page. Our idea is
to review the position statements on Thursday and then break out into
groups to work on specific questions. On Friday, we plan to discuss
the results produced by the various groups and then try to converge
towards a common conclusion where network management research should
focus during the next say 5 year.

/js

PS: Some position statements are still missing; I still like to
    receive them...

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