From sob@harvard.edu Sun Jul 1 13:48:12 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2075721F88D9 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 13:48:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RdxcGPIND+jL for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 13:48:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ackroyd.harvard.edu (ackroyd.harvard.edu [128.103.208.29]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98B2221F88C4 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 13:48:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exchange.university.harvard.edu (entwedge0000000.university.harvard.edu [10.35.2.151]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ackroyd.harvard.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62E2EE953C for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 16:48:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ENTWHUBT0000003.university.harvard.edu (192.168.36.24) by ENTWEDGE0000000.university.harvard.edu (10.35.2.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 16:47:20 -0400 Received: from ENTWEXMB0000008.university.harvard.edu ([169.254.1.61]) by entwhubt0000003.university.harvard.edu ([192.168.36.24]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 16:47:29 -0400 From: "Bradner, Scott" To: "opsawg@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] opsawg session has been scheduled Thread-Index: AQHNV8rVVr5TEHVk7U2BVfep8hKqyQ== Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 20:48:14 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [173.166.5.69] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <34FB6E3B62A3294CB5A7DFD3F60490E7@Exchange.university.harvard.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] opsawg session has been scheduled X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2012 20:48:12 -0000 Melinda sed: We've just gotten word that we've been scheduled to meet on Wednesday, 1 August from 1pm to 3pm. but the agenda is rather sparse to date - please let the list know if you h= ave something to talk about (but please talk about it on the list first) Scott From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Mon Jul 2 05:41:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 333AC21F87F4 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 05:41:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.178 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.178 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.071, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2EOZyE-EcEL for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 05:41:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D5621F8682 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 05:41:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.46]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84F91209DC; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 14:41:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6FsilzTYO_ZF; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 14:41:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 046F720BF4; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 14:41:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 71504203EC38; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 14:41:42 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 14:41:42 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Michael MacFaden Message-ID: <20120702124142.GA46404@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Michael MacFaden , opsawg@ietf.org References: <20120424185354.GA84350@elstar.local> <1848448462.2607134.1335302315758.JavaMail.root@zimbra-prod-mbox-2.vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1848448462.2607134.1335302315758.JavaMail.root@zimbra-prod-mbox-2.vmware.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Yet another hypervisor MIB X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 12:41:39 -0000 On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 02:18:35PM -0700, Michael MacFaden wrote: > js wrote: > > I will look at this in more detail tomorrow but it is clear already > > that this is not a valid MIB module. SMIv2 does not allow SEQUENCES > > inside of SEQUENCES. Anyway, I will try to figure out what the > > modeling differences are. > > Re: http://hg.scyphus.co.jp/virtsnmp > > The vm nic state is represented by copying selected objects > from ifTable/ifXTable. I do not think this is a desirable model. > Designing how to model the plumbing of a vm's nic > needs to support quite a few configurations. > > a) hypervisors that plumb a virtual machines set of nics directly to one or > more virtual layer 2 switches : (IEEE8021-BRIDGE-MIB / index > ieee8021BridgeBasePortComponenId and IEEE8021BridgePortNumber) > for the up/down state, source vm's nic mac address, and per vm/per port/per q-vlan > in/out/error byte/packet stats. > > b) virtualization software that plumbs to pseudo interfaces in host OS > visible in ifTable/ifStackTable. (seen with ifconfig -a) > > c) virtualization software that shunts nics directly to the host os nic > (no pseudo device). I think a) and b) fit the IETF model of interfaces, c) is a bit more "magic behind the scenes" and I am not sure a standards-track IETF specification should endorse this. Even if the OS has no pseudo device, would it be too hard to still export at the management interface a pseudo interface? /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From david.black@emc.com Thu Jul 5 15:07:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 375FC21F8607 for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 15:07:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.58 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3XPpqZ+FARYO for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 15:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (hop-nat-141.emc.com [168.159.213.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 572B921F8602 for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 15:06:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI01.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.54]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q65M7CFu021816 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 5 Jul 2012 18:07:13 -0400 Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhubhoprd02.lss.emc.com [10.254.221.253]) by hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Thu, 5 Jul 2012 18:07:02 -0400 Received: from mxhub20.corp.emc.com (mxhub20.corp.emc.com [10.254.93.49]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q65M72DN004690; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 18:07:02 -0400 Received: from mx15a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.189]) by mxhub20.corp.emc.com ([10.254.93.49]) with mapi; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 18:07:02 -0400 From: To: , Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 18:07:00 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-00.txt Thread-Index: Ac1JKmRXkIcM/BlyQRuuQy+R5xawHwRzpLyg Message-ID: <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE71208D3AE80@MX15A.corp.emc.com> References: <20120612195331.26093.18247.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-EMM-MHVC: 1 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 22:07:01 -0000 Hi Fred, > In Paris, I had at least two people tell me that they would be sending me > comments or would do something more substantive, earning co-author braggi= ng > rights. Er, ah ... one of those people would be me ;-). Here are some comments, and I do apologize for the delay caused by my day j= ob getting in the way of IETF work (yet again ...): I don't have much to say about firewall functionality, but I do want to see some discussion of the impact of server virtualization, particularly these two aspects: - Protection boundaries occur inside physical servers (e.g., VMs that require firewall separation may run on the same physical server). - Firewalls may be deployed as virtual machines (aka virtual appliances). The overall implication is that when servers are virtualized, the network effectively extends into servers, and one has to think about the resulting overall network topology (including the portions in the servers) in determining where the protection boundaries are at which perimeter security (section 2.1) and pervasive access control (section 2.2) firewalls should b= e deployed. On a related note, the discussion of perimeter security should acknowledge the usual security criticism of this approach - "hard and crunc= hy on the outside, soft and chewy on the inside" - once an attack is inside th= e perimeter, something else needs to be done for defense in depth. The firewalls may be deployed as physical nodes, part of other network node= s, virtual machines or a combination. Overlay network virtualization (the new nvo3 WG) will extend this need to consider virtual topology into the networ= k (beyond VLANs), making this even more "interesting". FWIW, I'm going to ignore the vyncke IPv6 draft that is referenced as it's targeted at home CP= E gear (e.g., the home "router" for DSL or cable modem) and I don't think ser= ver virtualization is relevant to that sort of system. I'm not sure where to put this new material - my initial thought is that putting it between sections 2 and 3 might fit the overall structure and flo= w of the draft, as this expands the applicability of the discussion in sectio= n 3.=20 Thanks, --David ---------------------------------------------------- David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA=A0 01748 +1 (508) 293-7953=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 FAX: +1 (508) 293-778= 6 david.black@emc.com=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 ---------------------------------------------------- > -----Original Message----- > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of > Fred Baker > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 2:00 AM > To: opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-00.txt >=20 > In Paris, I had at least two people tell me that they would be sending me > comments or would do something more substantive, earning co-author braggi= ng > rights. If they have sent them, I missed them. This is the draft that use= d to > be draft-baker-..., except with a WG name. Comments/discussion are of > interest. >=20 > On Jun 12, 2012, at 12:53 PM, drafts@ietf.org> wrote: >=20 > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > This draft is a work item of the Operations and Management Area Working > Group Working Group of the IETF. > > > > Title : On Firewalls in Internet Security > > Author(s) : Fred Baker > > Filename : draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-00.txt > > Pages : 12 > > Date : 2012-06-12 > > > > Abstract: > > There is an ongoing discussion regarding the place of firewalls in > > security. This note is intended to capture and try to make sense out > > of it. > > > > > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls > > > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/submission.filename }}-00 > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >=20 > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From melinda.shore@gmail.com Fri Jul 6 19:49:51 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1A5E11E80D5 for ; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 19:49:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.559 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qpsd-53ZaXyT for ; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 19:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C36311E8072 for ; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 19:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so15892131pbc.31 for ; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:50:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-forwarded-message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5ssEQR0GFwxBTtWlzh58i1l3KdGXYeRxW6h6UkMl0Kg=; b=UQ73O6u/kC1YaSimlk84r7K1+FbndT8VQfxjHVmR8yTfZl2A1t5v4bWFpsdnk/wfqd mrKSjATwsaA/HjM58yedWwHRLwe5cctGrMgXVpYb5Zca3OEsVd6XH8Ut/iWrQU2Bpkaw zvHyIh5jHIBccT9FglozA5glLI3nGNyMlne3wOlKdj5/bVZdmC4d5AALle5pV2YidV8I PmW23VP7W4ZGosLH8t7eEp3m38fl/mpKE2WEAxs1FxavsG4aKnF6IRPo7hykvA0AZlUS KD9XA/gSP0asN3XAm9JFZE7g7WAucNMbamSoMq0p90t59lA8Qx4ByMgVYkQkervCy6yV 1VhA== Received: by 10.68.219.166 with SMTP id pp6mr41370168pbc.35.1341629408198; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (66-230-81-117-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [66.230.81.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pi7sm22994091pbb.56.2012.07.06.19.50.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FF7A3DD.3090301@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 18:50:05 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "opsawg@ietf.org" References: <20120706211533.3449.10225.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120706211533.3449.10225.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20120706211533.3449.10225.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Fwd: NomCom 2012-13 Call for Volunteers X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2012 02:49:51 -0000 Please consider volunteering, if you are eligible. Melinda -------- Original Message -------- Subject: NomCom 2012-13 Call for Volunteers Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:15:33 -0700 From: NomCom Chair To: IETF Announcement List The IETF nominating committee process for 2012-13 has begun. The IETF nominating committee appoints folks to fill the open slots on the IAOC, the IAB, and the IESG. The 10 nominating committee members are selected randomly from a pool of volunteers. The more volunteers, the better chance we have of choosing a random yet representative cross section of the IETF population. The details of the operation of the nomcom can be found in RFC 3777. To be eligible, volunteers for the nomcom need to have attended 3 of the past 5 IETF meetings as of the time this announcement goes out. That is, 3 meetings from IETF 79 (Beijing) - IETF 83 (Paris). If you qualify, and if you will not be seeking appointment to any of the open positions that this nomcom will be filling, please consider volunteering. The list of people whose terms end with the March 2013 IETF meeting, and thus the positions for which the nominating committee is responsible for filling, are as follows: IAOC: -------- Dave Crocker IAB: -------- Alissa Cooper Joel Halpern David Kessens Danny McPherson Jon Peterson Dave Thaler IESG: -------- Russ Housley (General Area) Pete Resnick (Applications Area) Ralph Droms (Internet Area) Ronald Bonica (Operations and Management Area) Robert Sparks (Real-Time Applications and Infrastructure Area) Adrian Farrel (Routing Area) Stephen Farrell (Security Area) Wesley Eddy (Transport Area) The primary activity for this nomcom will begin in August 2012 and should be completed in January 2013. The nomcom will be collecting requirements from the community, as well as talking to candidates and obtaining feedback from community members about candidates. There will be regularly scheduled conference calls to ensure progress. Thus, being a nomcom member does require some time commitment. Please volunteer by sending an email before 11:59 pm EDT (UTC - 4 hours) August 5, 2012 as follows: To: mlepinski.ietf@gmail.com Subject: Nomcom 2012-13 Volunteer Please include the following information in the body: // As you enter in the IETF Registration Form, // First/Given name followed by Last/Family Name // typically what goes in the Company field // in the IETF Registration Form [] // // For confirmation if selected Please expect an email response from me within 3 business days stating whether or not you are qualified. If you don't receive a response, please re-send your email with the tag "RESEND:" added to the subject line. If you are not yet sure you would like to volunteer, please consider that nomcom members play a very important role in shaping the leadership of the IETF. Ensuring the leadership of the IETF is fair and balanced and comprised of those who can lead the IETF in the right direction is an important responsibility that rests on the IETF participants at large. Volunteering for the nomcom is a good way of contributing toward that goal. I will be publishing a more detailed timetable for nomcom activities, as well as details of the randomness seeds to be used for the RFC 3797 selection process, within the next couple weeks. Thank you, Matthew Lepinski mlepinski.ietf@gmail.com nomcom-chair@ietf.org From balajivenkat@force10networks.com Mon Jul 9 04:07:21 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9677021F864E for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 04:07:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hMMBLpA7w42j for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 04:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.force10networks.com (maa.force10networks.com [59.163.202.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96B0921F864B for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 04:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXCH-CLUSTER-11.force10networks.com ([10.16.127.21]) by exch7-maa-fe.force10networks.com ([10.16.126.10]) with mapi; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:37:40 +0530 From: Balaji Venkat Venkataswami To: "opsawg@ietf.org" , "rgroves@microsoft.com" , Janardhanan Pathangi Narasimhan , "phoose@fb.com" , Melinda Shore , "Bradner, Scott" Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:37:39 +0530 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] opsawg session has been scheduled Thread-Index: Ac1XytmzEtZLaEnsTuCupfFkwSVk5wF9ymZw Message-ID: <5EC91DDA759C324DB62C5A5F7B4922193D49B1CF81@EXCH-CLUSTER-11.force10networks.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Balaji Venkat Venkataswami Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] opsawg session has been scheduled X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:07:21 -0000 Dear Scott, Melinda, In light of the submission of the draft.... http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-janapath-opsawg-flowoam-req-00 the authors would like this draft to be presented for discussion. We would be much obliged if you could give us a slot for the same on 1st Au= gust. We would also like comments and discussion on this list if possible. An initial draft on Traceflow was submitted as a solution. Then when there was additional discussion on this with Ron Bonica and Melinda and a few oth= ers it was recommended that the requirements for flow analysis in DC environmen= ts be analyzed and specifically mentioned as a separate document. The above draft is a result of such a vetting. thanks and regards, balaji venkat ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 20:48:14 +0000 From: "Bradner, Scott" To: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] opsawg session has been scheduled Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii" Melinda sed: We've just gotten word that we've been scheduled to meet on Wednesday, 1 August from 1pm to 3pm. but the agenda is rather sparse to date - please let the list know if you h= ave something to talk about (but please talk about it on the list first) Scott ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg End of OPSAWG Digest, Vol 62, Issue 1 ************************************* From fanpeng@chinamobile.com Mon Jul 9 21:51:14 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E62EF11E80E1 for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 21:51:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.52 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.404, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MANGLED_TOOL=2.3, RELAY_IS_221=2.222] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HKHgAEI1wi4N for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 21:51:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (imss.chinamobile.com [221.130.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D89F21F8559 for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 21:51:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E142DE822; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:51:34 +0800 (CST) Received: from mail.chinamobile.com (unknown [10.1.28.22]) by imss.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5624E7CE; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:51:34 +0800 (CST) Received: from X6X8D79D8F49E2 ([10.2.43.116]) by mail.chinamobile.com (Lotus Domino Release 6.5.6) with ESMTP id 2012071012513294-28800 ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:51:32 +0800 From: "Fan Peng" To: Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:51:32 +0800 Message-ID: <001a01cd5e57$ad61dcd0$08259670$@chinamobile.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac1eV50Qjgd+xBXGS1mBwOZb/arxfw== X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2012-07-10 12:51:32, Serialize by Router on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2012-07-10 12:51:34, Serialize complete at 2012-07-10 12:51:34 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001B_01CD5E9A.BB878DD0" Content-Language: zh-cn X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.8231-6.8.0.1017-19030.002 X-TM-AS-Result: No--14.004-7.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--14.004-7.0-31-10;No--14.004-7.0-31-10 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No;No X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No;No Cc: ietf@cdl.asgaard.org, lilianyuan@chinamobile.com Subject: [OPSAWG] Feedback request: draft on IP/MPLS transmission interruption X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 04:51:14 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01CD5E9A.BB878DD0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Dear all, We have just updated the draft on IP/MPLS transmission interruption to 01 version, and we would like to hear comments from you. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interruption-01 We presented the last version in Paris hoping the industry could discuss the problem of whether the sub-50ms outage time requirement is suitable for IP/MPLS. We proposed at the meeting two principles for network and service design, configuration and operation: the IP/MPLS bearer should satisfy quality requirements of upper level services and applications, while services and applications should also take into account the intrinsic IP capabilities. We did analysis on softswitch and reached the IP interruption requirement of 3 sec. In this 01 version we added case of parameter configuration in SS7 network to illustrate principle 2 (adaptation to IP). We gave examples on SCTP and M2PA and delivered the concept that upper levels should be more tolerable to IP best effort to avoid frequent disconnection. Parameter configuration needs to consider both requirement of application and nature of IP. Influence on service like SMS is also involved. Any feedback would be highly appreciated. Thanks and regards, Fan, Peng ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01CD5E9A.BB878DD0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

Dear = all,

 

We have just updated the draft on IP/MPLS transmission = interruption to 01 version, and we would like to hear comments from = you.

 

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interru= ption-01

 

We presented the last version in Paris hoping the industry = could discuss the problem of whether the sub-50ms outage time = requirement is suitable for IP/MPLS. We proposed at the meeting two = principles for network and service design, configuration and operation: = the IP/MPLS bearer should satisfy quality requirements of upper level = services and applications, while services and applications should also = take into account the intrinsic IP capabilities. We did analysis on = softswitch and reached the IP interruption requirement of 3 = sec.

 

In this 01 version we added case of parameter configuration = in SS7 network to illustrate principle 2 (adaptation to IP). We gave = examples on SCTP and M2PA and delivered the concept that upper levels = should be more tolerable to IP best effort to avoid frequent = disconnection. Parameter configuration needs to consider both = requirement of application and nature of IP. Influence on service like = SMS is also involved.

 

Any feedback would be highly = appreciated.

 

Thanks and regards,

 

Fan, = Peng

------=_NextPart_000_001B_01CD5E9A.BB878DD0-- From melinda.shore@gmail.com Tue Jul 10 13:15:16 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCD7511E80D0 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:15:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.512 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.087, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u+JxDcgzgmkv for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:15:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4648B11E80CB for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:15:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so826047pbc.31 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:15:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OWJTy1tnDRJMiVnWCfiR61cDSi3L7eSS3AEfbAWg9d0=; b=lKapybl28V7kpSUn80n9dz5jF1+fGa0h8099XFr+l3kswpLXbWkJqWzZS2MVN7lC43 TKdHX4YTkHvcRNimcq06pL5uokh/pxVaVxWRTkh1lw4Obl9NjLMoMugNUw/3QLSP2war n+QMBuGYEyapDti6/6BE31N+qNJDvXetTp2oypaJb36qghrZ6QuLOa+K0WWHb+xbf6MJ UOFhCtCuKcDXXi10eFZFCU+hy8rveuxqi/dm3LsCkx3s1fIbQTmre0oqiafxq90xXqty VzCKVmoEi9jZdLtE5nJd4ahS/yqN17T4IVRdLdCV9c1gm7MmKDshvoMYuL8CW42ZKyUu ARgg== Received: by 10.68.242.168 with SMTP id wr8mr17781341pbc.44.1341951344795; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-41-146-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.41.146]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ph1sm163595pbb.45.2012.07.10.13.15.43 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FFC8D6E.6020806@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:15:42 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "opsawg@ietf.org" , Juergen Schoenwaelder , mrm@vmware.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Hypervisor MIB work? X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 20:15:16 -0000 Juergen, all: what's the status of this work? Are folks trying to resolve differences between the several proposals, or are these proceeding independently? Will there be something to discuss during the opsawg session in Vancouver? Thanks, Melinda From mrm@vmware.com Tue Jul 10 15:32:23 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D3EF11E810E for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8M4EKY74SEbB for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com [208.91.2.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5B3D11E80E6 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sc9-mailhost1.vmware.com (sc9-mailhost1.vmware.com [10.113.161.71]) by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B7D281B8; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zimbra-prod-mta-2.vmware.com (zimbra-prod-mta-2.vmware.com [10.113.160.174]) by sc9-mailhost1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C615318455; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra-prod-mta-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C050924015; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra-prod-mta-2.vmware.com Received: from zimbra-prod-mta-2.vmware.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra-prod-mta-2.vmware.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DZVIR8eQb0qZ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zimbra-prod-mbox-2.vmware.com (lbv-sc9-t2prod2-int.vmware.com [10.113.160.246]) by zimbra-prod-mta-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A172400F; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:32:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael MacFaden To: Melinda Shore Message-ID: <754275554.21225108.1341959570574.JavaMail.root@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <4FFC8D6E.6020806@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.113.60.13] X-Mailer: Zimbra 7.2.0_GA_2669 (ZimbraWebClient - GC20 (Mac)/7.2.0_GA_2669) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Hypervisor MIB work? X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:32:23 -0000 Melinda, Juergen informed me he has a new draft. I will continue to help shape this draft in open discussion on the opsawg list. Regards, Mike MacFaden ----- Original Message ----- > Juergen, all: what's the status of this work? Are folks trying to > resolve differences between the several proposals, or are these > proceeding independently? Will there be something to discuss during > the opsawg session in Vancouver? > > Thanks, > > Melinda > From melinda.shore@gmail.com Tue Jul 10 15:35:59 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C20C11E809F for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:35:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.518 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JAQK3S2BvIrB for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:35:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63B5821F84FA for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so994422pbc.31 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:36:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NN/3wEaaBA8aKCnzrmtPVxzOTkae8pqupIoh65LGx9o=; b=af5sMO456CwLozVyqpDreS1vd4DtIJMr/fZ+3A4pBFWQiP2PlrddQm0qTHecpUuQ7J NoFZIPjvfLirfYmgbO1aceo2UnbWXGJGo6ic736QLSFA1Xczz//Fsu9mTN39kawMa/sf 3lu1qtwBC0rBIXhXVnnw6lNwTLtBWLH2uvHH9ZHa0Z+RUfJQszh0NcVY7Z82olFxH8aq 0ydFmfJl8MY+9yGnicM7bB/j4tW/ewOS8s06FsAGuBhR1u4/w+GXJSFdqQdvvSKwjZE+ h0kB+19nGre3ZAt6wV4qY55i8Ua7ktQcMc2VeXAnDe/P9zx4YuO9alyj7geDPT0u0IQO W9YA== Received: by 10.68.200.98 with SMTP id jr2mr72584067pbc.81.1341959781161; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-41-146-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.41.146]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id wf7sm357225pbc.34.2012.07.10.15.36.19 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:36:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FFCAE62.10208@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 14:36:18 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael MacFaden References: <754275554.21225108.1341959570574.JavaMail.root@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <754275554.21225108.1341959570574.JavaMail.root@vmware.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Hypervisor MIB work? X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:35:59 -0000 On 7/10/12 2:32 PM, Michael MacFaden wrote: > Juergen informed me he has a new draft. I will continue to help > shape this draft in open discussion on the opsawg list. Excellent! Thank you. Do you think you'll need time for discussion in Vancouver? Melinda From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Wed Jul 11 02:23:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 348D921F850F for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 02:23:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ewVwP3+Y57Kk for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 02:23:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2747A21F850B for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 02:23:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.48]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA1920933; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:23:55 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sxmiU9IFPfvR; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:23:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1CCA20746; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:23:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 36C452051C89; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:23:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:23:52 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Melinda Shore Message-ID: <20120711092352.GA18153@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Melinda Shore , "opsawg@ietf.org" , mrm@vmware.com References: <4FFC8D6E.6020806@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4FFC8D6E.6020806@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Hypervisor MIB work? X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:23:27 -0000 On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:15:42PM -0800, Melinda Shore wrote: > Juergen, all: what's the status of this work? Are folks trying to > resolve differences between the several proposals, or are these > proceeding independently? Will there be something to discuss during > the opsawg session in Vancouver? Melinda, the MIB module brought forward in draft-schoenw-opsawg-vm-mib is derived from an analysis of existing proprietary MIB modules. As such, the draft surely aims at integrating things. I will post an update of the draft before the cutoff incorporating feedback from the mailing list and I am working with Michael MacFaden to make sure we get things aligned with at least one commercial implementation. I am sure we will have questions left for Vancouver to discuss. If we are entitled to use some OPSAWG time, that would of course be great. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From agmalis@gmail.com Wed Jul 11 05:18:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A73DD21F850B for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:18:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_TOOL=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ntnfRyyV7ewq for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gg0-f172.google.com (mail-gg0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF1C621F8503 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ggnc4 with SMTP id c4so1194122ggn.31 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:18:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=Q5GQ2qq5hgtNPb8FmajKgYTjk+qpaZD1YFgh0VhQruA=; b=EwUSX4BuUuNbYxvLaPr7A6eqKYbFmGd5DMDvS5sp4fBwyIrBvrRjiTYo6ILpCZcwTz oauyPzBn4MychNTui9oEk9ybFqhk+2Uf5KtiO5aCY6t59jhq+rKNSsNdt4EK/C/6+H4E WODuzw57NMSIzGnxQBaatlIgG/PRwkPzUePj4CKjZMgynqm571TfHoxJt5TS7uAqO0FM /0gfeuZqvZs0UxTWCtzrvi1vi96kIoUvN/t8aNQ5fr4z+nLoBNM+IvjhOL7fq4tREcn/ jiFbOywS6Qc+lHKcum6wYu5wCVAihJMQ8F+d/QlZQNFVIQYx3XwhVL5EPmm+jzWVXLZp C2Ug== Received: by 10.50.89.169 with SMTP id bp9mr14331308igb.59.1342009136711; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:18:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.77.78 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:18:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <01da01cd5e96$70cab2d0$52601870$@olddog.co.uk> References: <01da01cd5e96$70cab2d0$52601870$@olddog.co.uk> From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 08:18:36 -0400 Message-ID: To: opsawg@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Feedback request: draft on IP/MPLS transmission interruption X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:18:27 -0000 Fan, With my PWE3 WG chair hat on: this draft doesn't currently take into account the restoration requirements for various pseudowire services over MPLS, such as TDM/private line, Ethernet, Frame Relay, ATM, and others. I trust that these requirements can be included in future revisions of this draft via collaboration with the PWE3 WG, and would also appreciate it if the draft could be presented to the PWE3 WG, assuming you will be discussing this draft in Vancouver. Thanks, Andy > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Fan Peng > Sent: 10 July 2012 05:52 > To: opsawg@ietf.org > Cc: ietf@cdl.asgaard.org; lilianyuan@chinamobile.com > Subject: [OPSAWG] Feedback request: draft on IP/MPLS transmission > interruption > > > > Dear all, > > > > We have just updated the draft on IP/MPLS transmission interruption to 01 > version, and we would like to hear comments from you. > > > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interruption-01 > > > > We presented the last version in Paris hoping the industry could discuss the > problem of whether the sub-50ms outage time requirement is suitable for > IP/MPLS. We proposed at the meeting two principles for network and service > design, configuration and operation: the IP/MPLS bearer should satisfy > quality requirements of upper level services and applications, while > services and applications should also take into account the intrinsic IP > capabilities. We did analysis on softswitch and reached the IP interruption > requirement of 3 sec. > > > > In this 01 version we added case of parameter configuration in SS7 network > to illustrate principle 2 (adaptation to IP). We gave examples on SCTP and > M2PA and delivered the concept that upper levels should be more tolerable to > IP best effort to avoid frequent disconnection. Parameter configuration > needs to consider both requirement of application and nature of IP. > Influence on service like SMS is also involved. > > > > Any feedback would be highly appreciated. > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > > Fan, Peng > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From ludovic.jacquin@inria.fr Wed Jul 11 05:41:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D86221F8623 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:41:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w-rGOQ2c0jRS for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:41:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 748E921F866D for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:41:39 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,567,1336341600"; d="scan'208";a="166442477" Received: from denver.inrialpes.fr ([194.199.24.123]) by mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 11 Jul 2012 14:42:08 +0200 Message-ID: <4FFD74A0.4010805@inria.fr> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:42:08 +0200 From: Ludovic Jacquin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; OpenBSD amd64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20120213 Thunderbird/9.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: opsawg@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Mohamed Ali Kaafar Subject: [OPSAWG] ICMP blackhole problem ID. X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:41:41 -0000 Hi, we have submitted an ID for the 84th IETF meeting, here is a quick summary: ICMP is a key protocol to exchange control and error messages over the Internet. Unfortunately it is frequent that some routers along a given path do not correctly process this protocol. This document provides a taxonomy of the problem in order to help an end user who suspects ICMP-related problems to better understand the situation, and possibly identify the faulty router(s). 2 usefull links if you are interested: the ID: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jacquin-opsawg-icmp-blackhole-problem/ the globecom'12 paper: http://hal.inria.fr/hal-00695746/en/ Feedbacks are welcome. Cheers, Ludovic. From joelja@bogus.com Wed Jul 11 07:12:34 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28CA821F865A for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 07:12:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.524 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pznKky8lfYcU for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 07:12:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6B3821F85A0 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 07:12:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from joels-MacBook-Air.local (c-98-234-216-143.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.234.216.143]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q6BECxUN058158 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:13:00 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4FFD89ED.9000906@bogus.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 07:13:01 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120704 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ludovic Jacquin References: <4FFD74A0.4010805@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <4FFD74A0.4010805@inria.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:13:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, Mohamed Ali Kaafar Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] ICMP blackhole problem ID. X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:12:34 -0000 Seems like there is substantial overlap with http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-icmp-filtering-03 On 7/11/12 5:42 AM, Ludovic Jacquin wrote: > Hi, > > we have submitted an ID for the 84th IETF meeting, here is a quick > summary: > > ICMP is a key protocol to exchange control and error messages over the > Internet. Unfortunately it is frequent that some routers along a > given path do not correctly process this protocol. This document > provides a taxonomy of the problem in order to help an end user who > suspects ICMP-related problems to better understand the situation, and > possibly identify the faulty router(s). > > 2 usefull links if you are interested: > the ID: > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jacquin-opsawg-icmp-blackhole-problem/ > the globecom'12 paper: http://hal.inria.fr/hal-00695746/en/ > > Feedbacks are welcome. > > Cheers, > Ludovic. > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > From vincent.roca@inria.fr Wed Jul 11 23:30:13 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3366121F8704 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 23:30:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HF4Yqoz-ouul for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 23:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C83DB21F8702 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 23:30:11 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,573,1336341600"; d="scan'208";a="150393178" Received: from geve.inrialpes.fr ([194.199.24.116]) by mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 12 Jul 2012 08:30:42 +0200 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Vincent Roca In-Reply-To: <4FFD89ED.9000906@bogus.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 08:30:42 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <03800193-BD58-433A-B5C6-8B6D83234FC8@inria.fr> References: <4FFD74A0.4010805@inria.fr> <4FFD89ED.9000906@bogus.com> To: joel jaeggli X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, Mohamed Ali Kaafar Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] ICMP blackhole problem ID. X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 06:30:13 -0000 Hello Joel, Thanks a lot for the pointer to the filtering draft, it's useful. This I-D discusses with a lot of details, for each and every ICMP(v4/v6) = message type, why and how a router should filter out (or rate-limit) this message, as well as the = consequences of such rules. This is very useful to understand some of the ICMP related policies that = network administrators may deploy. In our I-D we take the opposite standpoint. We try to understand, from = the end-user point of view, what's going on when ICMP malfunctions on a given path. This end-user = tries to infer as much information as possible (by default using only his own host, without any = vantage points in the core network), for instance to localize the router/ISP(s) that produce the = problems. Whether the network administrators have good reason to apply such filtering policies is a = different matter, especially as it can also result from configuration errors. So we think that these two = documents nicely complement each other. Do you agree with us? In any case, thanks for the feedback! Cheers, The authors On July 11, 2012, 16:13, joel jaeggli wrote: > Seems like there is substantial overlap with >=20 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-icmp-filtering-03 >=20 > On 7/11/12 5:42 AM, Ludovic Jacquin wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> we have submitted an ID for the 84th IETF meeting, here is a quick = summary: >>=20 >> ICMP is a key protocol to exchange control and error messages over = the Internet. Unfortunately it is frequent that some routers along a = given path do not correctly process this protocol. This document = provides a taxonomy of the problem in order to help an end user who = suspects ICMP-related problems to better understand the situation, and = possibly identify the faulty router(s). >>=20 >> 2 usefull links if you are interested: >> the ID: = http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jacquin-opsawg-icmp-blackhole-proble= m/ >> the globecom'12 paper: http://hal.inria.fr/hal-00695746/en/ >>=20 >> Feedbacks are welcome. >>=20 >> Cheers, >> Ludovic. >> _______________________________________________ >> OPSAWG mailing list >> OPSAWG@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From panda@hongo.wide.ad.jp Thu Jul 12 02:27:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB1A21F8776 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:27:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.904 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RELAY_IS_203=0.994] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fe-t-PpZLPqD for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp (mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp [203.178.135.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF8E21F85B8 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:26:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2001:200:180:8001:a869:6b3c:9527:56e1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:200:180:8001:a869:6b3c:9527:56e1]) by mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9C407108E4C7; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:27:31 +0900 (JST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp From: Hirochika Asai In-Reply-To: <20120702124142.GA46404@elstar.local> Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:27:31 +0900 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <11C4B74A-DBBD-4E91-AE29-EDE475C243D1@hongo.wide.ad.jp> References: <20120424185354.GA84350@elstar.local> <1848448462.2607134.1335302315758.JavaMail.root@zimbra-prod-mbox-2.vmware.com> <20120702124142.GA46404@elstar.local> To: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278) Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Yet another hypervisor MIB X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 09:27:01 -0000 Hi folks, Thanks to the comments from Juergen and Mike, I've removed invalid MIB definitions from my document and updated it. In addition to the MIB update, I've worked on developing an snmp agent as a net-snmp subagent. Note that the previous implementation was not good because it seems to contain memory leak problems, perhaps with the libvirt's python binding API, so I then started to use C from this verison. You can find my new implementation at the following page; Archive: http://dist.scyphus.co.jp/virtsnmpd/virtsnmpd-0.1.0b.tar.gz Repository: http://hg.scyphus.co.jp/virtsnmp/ MIB: = http://hg.scyphus.co.jp/virtsnmp/index.cgi/file/42970a0fd0ae/mibs/VMM-MIB.= txt My MIB document itself is similar to , but I found some differences from mine. Now I've started to summarize the differences and considerations from the viewpoint of implementors. (I think it will take some time...) Thanks, Hirochika On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:41 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 02:18:35PM -0700, Michael MacFaden wrote: >> js wrote: >>> I will look at this in more detail tomorrow but it is clear already >>> that this is not a valid MIB module. SMIv2 does not allow SEQUENCES >>> inside of SEQUENCES. Anyway, I will try to figure out what the >>> modeling differences are. >>=20 >> Re: http://hg.scyphus.co.jp/virtsnmp >>=20 >> The vm nic state is represented by copying selected objects >> from ifTable/ifXTable.=20 >=20 > I do not think this is a desirable model. >=20 >> Designing how to model the plumbing of a vm's nic >> needs to support quite a few configurations. >>=20 >> a) hypervisors that plumb a virtual machines set of nics directly to = one or >> more virtual layer 2 switches : (IEEE8021-BRIDGE-MIB / index >> ieee8021BridgeBasePortComponenId and IEEE8021BridgePortNumber) >> for the up/down state, source vm's nic mac address, and per vm/per = port/per q-vlan=20 >> in/out/error byte/packet stats. >>=20 >> b) virtualization software that plumbs to pseudo interfaces in host = OS >> visible in ifTable/ifStackTable. (seen with ifconfig -a) >>=20 >> c) virtualization software that shunts nics directly to the host os = nic=20 >> (no pseudo device). >=20 > I think a) and b) fit the IETF model of interfaces, c) is a bit more > "magic behind the scenes" and I am not sure a standards-track IETF > specification should endorse this. Even if the OS has no pseudo > device, would it be too hard to still export at the management > interface a pseudo interface? >=20 > /js >=20 > --=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >=20 --=20 Hirochika Asai , The University of Tokyo From fanpeng@chinamobile.com Thu Jul 12 03:22:43 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D6F021F87D4 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 03:22:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.428 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.428 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.284, BAYES_00=-2.599, CN_BODY_35=0.339, MANGLED_TOOL=2.3, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RELAY_IS_221=2.222] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XD4X-TfaIFBX for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 03:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (imss.chinamobile.com [221.130.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4656221F87D2 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 03:22:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714F8E893; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:23:15 +0800 (CST) Received: from mail.chinamobile.com (unknown [10.1.28.22]) by imss.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E157E48B; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:23:15 +0800 (CST) Received: from X6X8D79D8F49E2 ([10.2.43.116]) by mail.chinamobile.com (Lotus Domino Release 6.5.6) with ESMTP id 2012071218231275-51741 ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:23:12 +0800 From: "Fan Peng" To: "'Andrew G. Malis'" , Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:23:18 +0800 Message-ID: <005a01cd6018$5b1e5ad0$115b1070$@chinamobile.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac1gGFk1kFpHC9FbR6uo0ZD+l596vQ== X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2012-07-12 18:23:12, Serialize by Router on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2012-07-12 18:23:14, Serialize complete at 2012-07-12 18:23:14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Language: zh-cn X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.8231-6.8.0.1017-19034.006 X-TM-AS-Result: No--30.735-7.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--30.735-7.0-31-10;No--30.735-7.0-31-10 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No;No X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No;No Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Feedback request: draft on IP/MPLS transmission interruption X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 10:22:43 -0000 Hi Andrew, We mainly focused on CS part of mobile core network up to now, but = failed to spare much time on other services like pseudowire. I think this document would be more meaningful if it covers a wide range of typical services = with thorough analysis and accurate use cases, but analysis on a single = service would be time-consuming and even hard to reach a conclusion. So I am = very excited hearing there would be help from PWE3 WG. I will be at the = meeting and would also appreciate the chance to discuss the issue in PWE3. Thanks and regards, Fan, Peng -----=D3=CA=BC=FE=D4=AD=BC=FE----- =B7=A2=BC=FE=C8=CB: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org = [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] =B4=FA=B1=ED Andrew G. Malis =B7=A2=CB=CD=CA=B1=BC=E4: 2012=C4=EA7=D4=C211=C8=D5 20:19 =CA=D5=BC=FE=C8=CB: opsawg@ietf.org =D6=F7=CC=E2: Re: [OPSAWG] Feedback request: draft on IP/MPLS = transmission interruption Fan, With my PWE3 WG chair hat on: this draft doesn't currently take into = account the restoration requirements for various pseudowire services over MPLS, = such as TDM/private line, Ethernet, Frame Relay, ATM, and others. I trust = that these requirements can be included in future revisions of this draft via collaboration with the PWE3 WG, and would also appreciate it if the = draft could be presented to the PWE3 WG, assuming you will be discussing this draft in Vancouver. Thanks, Andy > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On=20 > Behalf Of Fan Peng > Sent: 10 July 2012 05:52 > To: opsawg@ietf.org > Cc: ietf@cdl.asgaard.org; lilianyuan@chinamobile.com > Subject: [OPSAWG] Feedback request: draft on IP/MPLS transmission=20 > interruption > > > > Dear all, > > > > We have just updated the draft on IP/MPLS transmission interruption to = > 01 version, and we would like to hear comments from you. > > > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interruption- > 01 > > > > We presented the last version in Paris hoping the industry could=20 > discuss the problem of whether the sub-50ms outage time requirement is = > suitable for IP/MPLS. We proposed at the meeting two principles for=20 > network and service design, configuration and operation: the IP/MPLS=20 > bearer should satisfy quality requirements of upper level services and = > applications, while services and applications should also take into=20 > account the intrinsic IP capabilities. We did analysis on softswitch=20 > and reached the IP interruption requirement of 3 sec. > > > > In this 01 version we added case of parameter configuration in SS7=20 > network to illustrate principle 2 (adaptation to IP). We gave examples = > on SCTP and M2PA and delivered the concept that upper levels should be = > more tolerable to IP best effort to avoid frequent disconnection.=20 > Parameter configuration needs to consider both requirement of = application and nature of IP. > Influence on service like SMS is also involved. > > > > Any feedback would be highly appreciated. > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > > Fan, Peng > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From melinda.shore@gmail.com Fri Jul 13 11:24:49 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E91021F86B4 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:24:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KJ5xWfcX47IM for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:24:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0286E21F86C2 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:24:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so6177846pbc.31 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:25:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5VuZnRfM6j23x+rJ1J05q/tOzlAboGwDGzK3RdVplsE=; b=CkVyLwKoySr01KIoSIKvdvQ3I/kIiqGMJEntgQVbRhdUfsEcqQZXPep3pmdWHyMKfJ fHiR9JmkZMN1b8mVC0w2CcK1G6/GSw9xR4iVpr7LMDtWzAYgaMJo4/7ZMAuigrm8XZx5 SQz/avRftLk43tXraLeseNCNRmCBXeyvZgkcx6YVC+CsXiqARuG72PL8JEQzD5QSOb9o U2ABuuqOhd4tzMMyK0UG5te4ER0Yt2Q583ZKOzr1wBPDtmZYqdfs9FOj7oiSn782Vu/c /aIjCOlQFwB30ihJEI7455PproIDDShlC0c5zerKcCoiUiYZtRTcIJPdFwS1IQT5xWUd zSJg== Received: by 10.68.234.104 with SMTP id ud8mr5314125pbc.163.1342203924727; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:25:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-41-146-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.41.146]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qd2sm2639986pbb.29.2012.07.13.11.25.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <50006811.6040601@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 10:25:21 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "opsawg@ietf.org" , "opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Draft agenda for Vancouver X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 18:24:49 -0000 OPSAWG 15:10 - 17:10, 2 august 2012 Agenda 1) Administrivia Blue sheets, scribes, agenda bashing 5 minutes opsawg ------ chairs: Scott Bradner, Christopher Liljenstolpe, Melinda Shore 2) Status update 10 minutes Current document status draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview draft-ietf-opsawgautomated-network-configuration 3) draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment 15 minutes 4) draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls 15 minutes 5) draft-janapath-opsawg-flowoam-req 10 minutes 6) draft-schoenw-opsawg-vm-mib 10 minutes 7) draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interruption 10 minutes 8) draft-shore-icmp-aup 10 minutes opsarea ------- chairs/ADs: Ron Bonica, Benoit Claise 6) Network management requirements for new 30 minutes protocols (Romascanu/Nadeau) 7) ??? 15 minutes From melinda.shore@gmail.com Fri Jul 13 16:50:07 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7067E11E80EE for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:50:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.537 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lUPEhug5Uuew for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:50:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD93811E80C0 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:50:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so6553319pbc.31 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:50:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JdP1oG18bjwe8cS9L3V8mznCYRsMotUGwmHROLfoR9I=; b=ZUl63E/kz3cMs92MkNAsXSXgsvt0IoFxvf+IA7XrVlALIiE1JdalX6qe3o75JF0fRY B2Iv/pIy5j9tAmUJ/hO4rBeMDF5/t2kXdQ872Y9D5weG5DEjIUyxEoDveegZ9ib8oozj ZhiFIPRekgar+YCK8LH4tz55GD/xxZMRbyVVmrIqbziJQeBcWnNVEVvVjGQv9/TbEUKd 9v6bfXsIWH8zTwI/Ra520fG5CmzafHdzQ/ODZJRB4wLmwQnPXgp0sTj8iKTEfMRA6xee 41bn7DuUesckb68m96KRsxyK75RVMU7BboHdAn3PUdimew+1jEDZn9oCl+G8brdMO1LF wURA== Received: by 10.68.189.135 with SMTP id gi7mr7277035pbc.68.1342223444097; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-41-146-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.41.146]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qa5sm6901588pbb.19.2012.07.13.16.50.42 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5000B451.4070801@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 15:50:41 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "opsawg@ietf.org" , "opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "christopher.liljenstolpe@bigswitch.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Revised agenda X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 23:50:07 -0000 OPSAWG 15:10 - 17:10, 2 august 2012 Agenda 1) Administrivia Blue sheets, scribes, agenda bashing 5 minutes opsawg ------ chairs: Scott Bradner, Christopher Liljenstolpe, Melinda Shore 2) Status update 10 minutes Current document status draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview draft-ietf-opsawgautomated-network-configuration 3) draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment 15 minutes 4) draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls 15 minutes 5) draft-janapath-opsawg-flowoam-req 10 minutes 6) draft-schoenw-opsawg-vm-mib 10 minutes 7) draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interruption 10 minutes opsarea ------- chairs/ADs: Ron Bonica, Benoit Claise 8) Network management requirements for new 30 minutes protocols (Romascanu/Nadeau) 9) ??? 15 minutes 10) Operational issues with X.509 certificates 15 minutes (Tim Moses) From dromasca@avaya.com Sat Jul 14 00:38:47 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B80F21F8679 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 00:38:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.464 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.464 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.135, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ABV-6YHFE1Ai for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 00:38:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 425BF21F8675 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 00:38:45 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFANQgAVCHCzI1/2dsb2JhbABFuCSBB4IgAQEBAQMBAQEPHgo0FwQCAQgNBAQBAQsGDAsBBgEmHwkIAQEEARIIARmHawucZJ0DizyFImADmzKKDoJh X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,584,1336363200"; d="scan'208";a="315024604" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 14 Jul 2012 03:35:56 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.13]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 14 Jul 2012 03:20:13 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 09:39:19 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <50006811.6040601@gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Draft agenda for Vancouver Thread-Index: Ac1hJOKvgLlASzJgR82puHN3eUB7xgAbmD2A References: <50006811.6040601@gmail.com> From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Melinda Shore" , , Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Draft agenda for Vancouver X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:38:47 -0000 Hi Melinda, ??? is I believe the place holder for 'Management of Networks of Constrained Devices'. We have an Internet draft currently available at http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-00.txt, we may have a new version by the submission cut-off time tomorrow.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Melinda Shore > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 9:25 PM > To: opsawg@ietf.org; opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org > Subject: [OPSAWG] Draft agenda for Vancouver >=20 > OPSAWG > 15:10 - 17:10, 2 august 2012 >=20 > Agenda >=20 > 1) Administrivia > Blue sheets, scribes, agenda bashing 5 minutes >=20 > opsawg > ------ >=20 > chairs: Scott Bradner, Christopher Liljenstolpe, Melinda Shore >=20 > 2) Status update 10 minutes > Current document status > draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls > draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment > draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview > draft-ietf-opsawgautomated-network-configuration >=20 > 3) draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment 15 minutes >=20 > 4) draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls 15 minutes >=20 > 5) draft-janapath-opsawg-flowoam-req 10 minutes >=20 > 6) draft-schoenw-opsawg-vm-mib 10 minutes >=20 > 7) draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interruption 10 minutes >=20 > 8) draft-shore-icmp-aup 10 minutes >=20 >=20 > opsarea > ------- >=20 > chairs/ADs: Ron Bonica, Benoit Claise >=20 > 6) Network management requirements for new 30 minutes > protocols (Romascanu/Nadeau) >=20 >=20 > 7) ??? 15 minutes >=20 > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From melinda.shore@gmail.com Sat Jul 14 08:40:48 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 130D321F86B7 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 08:40:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.54 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.54 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.059, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NwGe17vkELP3 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 08:40:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 766BC21F84EE for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 08:40:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id wy7so7660354pbc.31 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 08:41:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JxUplwQlHxlM6RrkIEpKujzwLA+odX76+OrerB2zuX0=; b=cp95TIQgCgsTclSuhkizj5a5qIE38B3VeiaV2G6ySTl3gCLHV6+FNlywCEeocTO+o5 +32aAJ3ivat3yp9i+yEQmNvmTNOw5hkXwCB37BOW+fDAiMAoyJrJQIY9/h+iPG2avYEu HwM5zP+EkRhAu2XfJ78O+a8SdSN8uvAqHC5+f+eMSMzulQklv6Hhkp5Dl/+V0GsxVElN 4PbLSvsjHWQ5q08l6Lp3eegdHbw7CaiUHNtp7mvZJAyslJ+jwdo06lIUs9mLOhfQ6TQY H7fRF57Ed05aNCKG/QCZSu9Qa4L0pc2KobQnILcVQzkS7di4NW2nUs5NUViQ1Gzl/iox B7rg== Received: by 10.68.238.105 with SMTP id vj9mr12461726pbc.111.1342280486701; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 08:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-41-146-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.41.146]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pe8sm8226877pbc.76.2012.07.14.08.41.24 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 14 Jul 2012 08:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <50019323.7050500@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:41:23 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" References: <50006811.6040601@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Draft agenda for Vancouver X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 15:40:48 -0000 Thanks - I've uploaded the updated agenda. OPSAWG 15:10 - 17:10, 2 august 2012 Agenda 1) Administrivia Blue sheets, scribes, agenda bashing 5 minutes opsawg ------ chairs: Scott Bradner, Christopher Liljenstolpe, Melinda Shore 2) Status update 10 minutes Current document status draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview draft-ietf-opsawgautomated-network-configuration 3) draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment 15 minutes 4) draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls 15 minutes 5) draft-janapath-opsawg-flowoam-req 10 minutes 6) draft-schoenw-opsawg-vm-mib 10 minutes 7) draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interruption 10 minutes opsarea ------- chairs/ADs: Ron Bonica, Benoit Claise 8) Network management requirements for new 30 minutes protocols (Romascanu/Nadeau) 9) draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt 15 minutes (Romascanu/Ersue) 10) Operational issues with X.509 certificates 15 minutes (Tim Moses) From vincent.roca@inria.fr Mon Jul 16 00:46:44 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E3321F8606 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:46:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xvId2fL67uv7 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:46:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B82C021F854E for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:46:43 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,592,1336341600"; d="scan'208";a="166967621" Received: from geve.inrialpes.fr ([194.199.24.116]) by mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 16 Jul 2012 09:47:11 +0200 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Vincent Roca In-Reply-To: <50019323.7050500@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:47:11 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <50006811.6040601@gmail.com> <50019323.7050500@gmail.com> To: Melinda Shore X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Draft agenda for Vancouver X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 07:46:44 -0000 Hi Melinda, Is there a slot for me to introduce our I-D (10' is sufficient)?=20 ICMP black hole: problem position = http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jacquin-opsawg-icmp-blackhole-proble= m/ Thanks a lot. Cheers, Vincent > Thanks - I've uploaded the updated agenda. >=20 > OPSAWG > 15:10 - 17:10, 2 august 2012 >=20 > Agenda >=20 > 1) Administrivia > Blue sheets, scribes, agenda bashing 5 minutes >=20 > opsawg > ------ >=20 > chairs: Scott Bradner, Christopher Liljenstolpe, Melinda Shore >=20 > 2) Status update 10 minutes > Current document status > draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls > draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment > draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview > draft-ietf-opsawgautomated-network-configuration >=20 > 3) draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment 15 minutes >=20 > 4) draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls 15 minutes >=20 > 5) draft-janapath-opsawg-flowoam-req 10 minutes >=20 > 6) draft-schoenw-opsawg-vm-mib 10 minutes >=20 > 7) draft-fan-opsawg-transmission-interruption 10 minutes >=20 >=20 >=20 > opsarea > ------- >=20 > chairs/ADs: Ron Bonica, Benoit Claise >=20 > 8) Network management requirements for new 30 minutes > protocols (Romascanu/Nadeau) >=20 > 9) draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt 15 minutes > (Romascanu/Ersue) >=20 > 10) Operational issues with X.509 certificates 15 minutes > (Tim Moses) >=20 > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From melinda.shore@gmail.com Mon Jul 16 09:21:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39AE521F8543 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:21:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.545 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.545 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.054, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ijZutQSBw1u1 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69E2821F8533 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so10748748pbc.31 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:22:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jkyC3pDecACzLZlfbDjX1UnPa1qLy6zXb7pXhEU2P7Q=; b=UZHgQd6awy2k8P9CLYn6x7cUoIj8vVZ95IseAEC3o18Z/+aK/elRGTH5yQAAIg+GFL A0kLgt9C3iIxHXn76Vx1A3/nQd0vP6NqLuTImK1XthoBMf1/U+8/zmkPaVKmgIpZw39F ZKkdssisTrSqpje6IWbAVrMUK3k1UfGBFLCE+aUpPjxUaBxhUmqo/17M+BUxW0qsa39y VxbJT03OJlcpNGdJDgjInjK5Nmo9AQw2ZUgdB2ncqNKBl0R3q2fW35sNAawZ6cML1Fke jdc4wm9QbJ4OwcQ429pSA0a01FP2fczyncLcWy8RiBz77B30PyuBW4BlR5J4inQTzXe1 AC+g== Received: by 10.68.239.103 with SMTP id vr7mr28018016pbc.0.1342455740460; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:22:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (216-67-41-146-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [216.67.41.146]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id og4sm12162082pbb.48.2012.07.16.09.22.18 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:22:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <50043FB9.6060904@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 08:22:17 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vincent Roca References: <50006811.6040601@gmail.com> <50019323.7050500@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Draft agenda for Vancouver X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:21:36 -0000 On 7/15/12 11:47 PM, Vincent Roca wrote: > Is there a slot for me to introduce our I-D (10' is sufficient)? Hi, Vincent: At this point the agenda's full, although it's possible that something might open up. However, the right place to introduce a draft is here on the mailing list. Melinda From bclaise@cisco.com Mon Jul 16 10:15:24 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E52E11E80FC; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:15:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.345 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.345 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.965, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, TVD_SPACE_RATIO=2.219] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OqgMvXG44iyL; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FF111E811E; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:15:22 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q6GGoYk9009422; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:50:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.60.67.85] (ams-bclaise-8914.cisco.com [10.60.67.85]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q6GGoXBo003414; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:50:34 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <50044659.1000903@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:50:33 +0200 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ietf-action@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-kuarsingh-lsn-deployment -> draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:15:24 -0000 Hi Can you please link draft-kuarsingh-lsn-deployment to draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment? Regards, Benoit. From joelja@bogus.com Mon Jul 16 11:07:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1529A11E828D for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:07:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.33 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.33 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.269, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RV6PJgePcusf for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41E0B11E828C for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from joels-MacBook-Air.local (host-64-47-153-50.masergy.com [64.47.153.50]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q6GI7sbY002755 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:07:55 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <50045875.9040906@bogus.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:07:49 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120704 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vincent Roca References: <4FFD74A0.4010805@inria.fr> <4FFD89ED.9000906@bogus.com> <03800193-BD58-433A-B5C6-8B6D83234FC8@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <03800193-BD58-433A-B5C6-8B6D83234FC8@inria.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:07:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, Mohamed Ali Kaafar Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] ICMP blackhole problem ID. X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:07:11 -0000 On 7/11/12 11:30 PM, Vincent Roca wrote: > Hello Joel, > > Thanks a lot for the pointer to the filtering draft, it's useful. > > This I-D discusses with a lot of details, for each and every ICMP(v4/v6) message type, why and how > a router should filter out (or rate-limit) this message, as well as the consequences of such rules. This > is very useful to understand some of the ICMP related policies that network administrators may deploy. > > In our I-D we take the opposite standpoint. We try to understand, from the end-user point of view, > what's going on when ICMP malfunctions on a given path. This end-user tries to infer as much > information as possible (by default using only his own host, without any vantage points in the core > network), for instance to localize the router/ISP(s) that produce the problems. Whether the network > administrators have good reason to apply such filtering policies is a different matter, especially as it > can also result from configuration errors. So we think that these two documents nicely complement > each other. Do you agree with us? Detecting the existence of path mtu discovery failure is important. I believe they are complementary, probably to the point of overlap. > In any case, thanks for the feedback! > > Cheers, > > The authors > > > On July 11, 2012, 16:13, joel jaeggli wrote: > >> Seems like there is substantial overlap with >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-icmp-filtering-03 >> >> On 7/11/12 5:42 AM, Ludovic Jacquin wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> we have submitted an ID for the 84th IETF meeting, here is a quick summary: >>> >>> ICMP is a key protocol to exchange control and error messages over the Internet. Unfortunately it is frequent that some routers along a given path do not correctly process this protocol. This document provides a taxonomy of the problem in order to help an end user who suspects ICMP-related problems to better understand the situation, and possibly identify the faulty router(s). >>> >>> 2 usefull links if you are interested: >>> the ID: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jacquin-opsawg-icmp-blackhole-problem/ >>> the globecom'12 paper: http://hal.inria.fr/hal-00695746/en/ >>> >>> Feedbacks are welcome. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Ludovic. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OPSAWG mailing list >>> OPSAWG@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> OPSAWG mailing list >> OPSAWG@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Jul 16 15:57:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A69C911E8175; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:57:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.517 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.517 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.082, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K5W6nRMb3wSV; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:57:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50C411E8158; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:57:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.30p3 Message-ID: <20120716225738.21145.27685.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:57:38 -0700 Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration-04.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 22:57:40 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Operations and Management Area Working Gr= oup Working Group of the IETF. Title : Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Lar= ge IP Networks Author(s) : Tina Tsou Juergen Schoenwaelder Yang Shi Tom Taylor Guoliang Yang Filename : draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration-04.txt Pages : 24 Date : 2012-07-16 Abstract: This memo discusses the steps required to bring a large number of devices into service in IP networks in an automated fashion. The goal of this document is to list known solutions where they exist, to point out approaches proven to be problematic, and to identify gaps that require further specifications. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-config= uration There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuratio= n-04 A diff from previous version is available at: http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-co= nfiguration-04 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Wed Jul 25 11:13:57 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9ADF21F8747; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:13:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.573 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.573 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.026, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7hlLVmB6DCeV; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:13:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 293AD21F8739; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:13:57 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.30p3 Message-ID: <20120725181357.21674.65763.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:13:57 -0700 Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: [OPSAWG] Last Call: (Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Large IP Networks) to Informational RFC X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:13:58 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Operations and Management Area Working Group WG (opsawg) to consider the following document: - 'Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Large IP Networks' as Informational RFC The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-08-15. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract This memo discusses the steps required to bring a large number of devices into service in IP networks in an automated fashion. The goal of this document is to list known solutions where they exist, to point out approaches proven to be problematic, and to identify gaps that require further specifications. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration/ballot/ The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1706/ http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1735/ From joelja@bogus.com Fri Jul 27 11:14:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6216911E80A1; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:14:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HF+OKCuXck-G; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:14:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAC7B11E8096; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:14:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-6624.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-6624.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.102.36]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q6RIE3Lo098450 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 27 Jul 2012 18:14:03 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <5012DA6B.5070501@bogus.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:14:03 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/15.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ietf@ietf.org References: <20120725181357.21674.65763.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120725181357.21674.65763.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Fri, 27 Jul 2012 18:14:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Last Call: (Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Large IP Networks) to Informational RFC X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 18:14:04 -0000 The document spends more time on the taxonomy of the existing solutions then I think is really warranted for a document purportory to be a problem statement. That said I think the document is a worst harmless, and describes the problem fairly well. joel On 7/25/12 11:13 AM, The IESG wrote: > The IESG has received a request from the Operations and Management Area > Working Group WG (opsawg) to consider the following document: > - 'Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Large IP > Networks' > as > Informational RFC > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-08-15. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > This memo discusses the steps required to bring a large number of > devices into service in IP networks in an automated fashion. The > goal of this document is to list known solutions where they exist, to > point out approaches proven to be problematic, and to identify gaps > that require further specifications. > > > > > The file can be obtained via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration/ > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration/ballot/ > > > The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1706/ > http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1735/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > From panda@hongo.wide.ad.jp Mon Jul 30 01:03:17 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 277B821F86BA for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 01:03:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.904 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RELAY_IS_203=0.994] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R8WkRRjMdFlO for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 01:03:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp (mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp [203.178.135.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C8BC21F86BD for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 01:03:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.78.2] (tc.b.scyphus.co.jp [219.117.248.118]) by mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D172C108E4C7; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:03:12 +0900 (JST) From: Hirochika Asai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:03:11 +0900 To: opsawg@ietf.org Message-Id: <9032A714-7304-4A29-82B9-3D2955158925@hongo.wide.ad.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278) Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib-00 X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:03:17 -0000 Hi all, I'm Hirochika Asai, an implementer of the SNMP agent for hypervisors and virtual machines. # posted on July 12, 2012 We have submitted an I-D related to our yet another hypervisor MIB. Please review the following URL for the I-D: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-asai-vmm-mib-00.txt I had sent the URL to the MIB definition and our implementation with libvirt to the mailing list before, but I think you prefer I-D to personal web pages or repository. Therefore, we've submitted it though it's after cut-off and during this IETF meeting. This I-D include the opinions as an implementer and operator of hypervisors. The main differences from and our opinions are summarized as follows: 1. vifIndex We define vifIndex that is different from the pointers to ifIndex of IF-MIB and recommended to starting from 1. This is because is shall be changed on re-initialization of virtual machines. So, we think vmIfIndex is not resilient to the re-initialization and it is not good as the index. Moreover, the order of the underlying interface is not guaranteed to match the order at the virtual machine. For example, the order mismatches when vnic1 and vnic2 of the virtual machine can be assigned to tap101(ifIndex=3D201) and tap100(ifIndex=3D200), respectively. 2. vstorageEntry We defined the storage information in vstorageEntry but it does not include a pointer to hrStorageIndex of HOST-RESOURCES-MIB. This is because virtual machine's storage is not "host resource" but it is allocated from host (hypervisor) resource, so we think it is not appropriate to appear in hrStorageTable. Open issue: Is it better to define "STORAGE-MIB" that can be commonly used to all devices (not limited to host resources) like IF-MIB? 3. vcpuTable and vcpuAffinityTable =46rom the viewpoint of the operation of hypervisors and virtual machines, the utilization of each virtual CPU and the information on virtual CPU affinity are much informative to optimize CPU pining. We are also deploying our implementation to our cloud. If you are interested in it, one of the authors attending this IETF can show you our use and deployment. Thank you, Hirochika --=20 Hirochika Asai , The University of Tokyo From aakhter@cisco.com Mon Jul 30 08:50:14 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 153D021F8462; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:50:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p3oYDwXr9-Ij; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:50:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06B9521F8491; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:50:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=aakhter@cisco.com; l=4974; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1343663413; x=1344873013; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=YMN1j7ayExurZfDFxuWcbpcnRjbr2uP/iQ4mA+VTTXc=; b=e4b4bNxCMM0wKtTVTPqdzHwpRv0x61KvD2TMGAwykkzhOYNyt3svv5+m F3M0bSFv/+ljUpeyxqjTAwBBsYOVbtjDIubo/YhljdnM0gi8eU3k9JR14 QNGA7bez51dBvghWYdIqP8nIRKn36QreTtGmruht/KmZYs3a2MeBh8y+8 E=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAMesFlCtJXHA/2dsb2JhbABFuVaBB4IgAQEBBBIBJz8MBAIBCBEEAQELFBAyHQgBAQQBDQUIGodrmnmfdYtQFIVuYAOLMZBfh2CBZoJfgVY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,679,1336348800"; d="scan'208";a="106668134" Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Jul 2012 15:50:11 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com [173.37.183.86]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6UFoAls010322 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:50:10 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.5.162]) by xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com ([173.37.183.86]) with mapi id 14.02.0298.004; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:50:10 -0500 From: "Aamer Akhter (aakhter)" To: "Jan Novak (janovak)" , "'ipfix@ietf.org'" , "'opsawg@ietf.org'" Thread-Topic: Comments on draft-akhter-opsawg-perfmon-ipfix-02 Thread-Index: Ac0zc8BXTR41oCKqTcOQDS4l95WyzAEhILoQDYLiRuA= Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:50:09 +0000 Message-ID: <75C0E47A1889264493A2DCB2869AC0960F50A853@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com> References: <201205161453.q4GErZNl015927@alpd052.aldc.att.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [64.102.41.104] x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19070.006 x-tm-as-result: No--47.978000-8.000000-31 x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Hendrik Scholz , 'Al Morton' , "'pmol@ietf.org'" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Comments on draft-akhter-opsawg-perfmon-ipfix-02 X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:50:14 -0000 Hi Jan, Thank-you for the review. Please find my comments below. We Hendrik and I w= ill be publishing -03 shortly.=20 -----Original Message----- From: Jan Novak (janovak)=20 Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 4:58 AM To: Aamer Akhter (aakhter); ipfix@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org Cc: Al Morton; pmol@ietf.org Subject: Comments on draft-akhter-opsawg-perfmon-ipfix-02 Hi Amer, I have reviewed your draft draft-akhter-opsawg-perfmon-ipfix-02.txt. There seems to be a lot of text overlap with your methodology document - se= ction 1,3, 4 could probably be abbreviated or omitted leaving the document = just with raw IPFIX IE specifications or just add the IE specification as s= ub-sections or a new section into the first document ??=20 AA> I agree that there is overlap, but it was retained for readability. But= I see your point regarding keeping the focus on the IEs in the IPFIX versi= on of the draft. Will strip some of the detail in the IPFIX version. Section 2 uses definitions from RFC5610 - I think those you use there are d= efined in RFC5102 as DataTypeSemantic, units and range while RFC5610 specifies how this information should be exported - here you are de= fining the IE itself so you should use the definitions from RFC5102 AA> I think I had used RFC5610 as it seemed to be a bit more specific about= it (eg rangeBegin and rangeEnd rather than just range). But we are fine e= ither way depending on feedback. Also the methodology documents already speaks in terms of IPFIX IEs while y= ou are trying to specify some performance metrics - the methodology could h= ave names and an exact definitions of the metric and then a reference which= IE represents the particular metric AA> will update the methodology doc with exact definitions and reference th= e IEs.=20 RFC5102 section 2.1 specifies a template for IEs with a MUST so the MUST en= tries should be literally followed in your IEs spec - namely name, elementID, description, dataType and status. RFC5102 section 2.1 specifies MAY entries for the template - like DataTypeS= emantic, units, name - might be preferable to follow the naming as well You interchanged ElementId with name - ElementId should be the numerical ID= of the particular IE, while name of the IE is actually missing AA> Jan, can you look again? I see name (eg. perfPacketExpected) and Elemen= t ID (eg. TBDperfPacketExpected). The TBDperfPacketExpected is actually a p= lace holder for the IANA defined value. Is there still a problem? Instead of using Observation Point - wouldn't be the scope of the element a= ppropriate ?? Or if not then scope should be actually added - are the metri= cs (like perfPacketLoss) applicable to all the traffic seen by the UUT (or = more specifically passing through the Observation Point) or to just individual flows ?? This should also be part of the parti= cular metric definition. AA> We're open to adding scope (as defined as which set of packets would th= is be applicable to). Would you agree that this is more of a methodology it= em than a IE item? Will your IEs be enterprise IEs or IANA ones ?? AA> The idea is to ask for IANA allocation. Section 4.1.2 - Units packets ?? AA> fixed Section 4.1.3 - there is a mis-match between the definition and the range - it should be limited to 0 - 100 + a value when the rate is unknown This d= efinition is also missing in section 4.1.3 of your methodology AA> there is a discussion going on regarding how to represent the unknown.= =20 AA> For the moment, I'll mark the high end as 0x64 (100d). But there also n= eeds to be agreement on how to represent float16, or we go directly to floa= t32. Sections 4.3.1, 4.3.2 - the values are just numbers/ids so units shouldn't = be octets but "none" ?? AA> agree. Copy-paste errors. The IPFIX guys here have had few discussions regarding IE definitions explo= sions with all the needs like this - have you thought using RFC6313 now (st= ructured data) ?? AA> only in the case of the unknown-- which has been purposely left out of = this document as there is another doc working on that. Is there a specific = set of IEs that would be suited to structured data? I am not sure I would use RFC2321 as a reference work :-). AA> someone checked :-) huic-ipfix-sipfix is not a work in progress - the ID expired 3 years ago. AA> This was merely to acknowledge prior work. I can take it out if needed. ie-doctors is a WG doc version 2 now - draft-ietf-ipfix-ie-doctors-02.txt AA> hopefully the xml tool will resolve this. pmol-metrics-framework is RFC 6390 AA> removed from ipfix draft, fixed in methodology draft. The document would benefit from running it through spell checker. AA> thanks and done :-) Rgds, Jan The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak succumb young ....=20 and the strong envy them. Dr. Johnson From randy@psg.com Mon Jul 30 11:39:58 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D89C711E80E0; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:39:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.484 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.115, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xnFWFhoIGELn; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:39:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716C611E80C5; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:39:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Svusn-000Mlm-7e; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:39:57 +0000 Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:39:57 -0700 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: IETF Disgust In-Reply-To: <20120725181357.21674.65763.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20120725181357.21674.65763.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Last Call: (Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Large IP Networks) to Informational RFC X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:39:58 -0000 > The IESG has received a request from the Operations and Management Area > Working Group WG (opsawg) to consider the following document: > - 'Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Large IP > Networks' > as > Informational RFC in general, imiho the document is not particularly harmful. but section 10 Conclusions makes recommendations which are inappropriate and contentious and should be removed. randy From panda@hongo.wide.ad.jp Mon Jul 30 22:15:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B681D21F85A8 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:15:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.904 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RELAY_IS_203=0.994] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2thlNcbfsjBJ for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:15:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp (mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp [203.178.135.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B0521F85E1 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:15:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (KD106170235212.au-net.ne.jp [106.170.235.212]) by mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0419A108E50B; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:15:47 +0900 (JST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp From: Hirochika Asai In-Reply-To: <9032A714-7304-4A29-82B9-3D2955158925@hongo.wide.ad.jp> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:15:45 +0900 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: <9032A714-7304-4A29-82B9-3D2955158925@hongo.wide.ad.jp> To: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278) Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib-00 X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:15:52 -0000 Hi all, I want to demonstrate a practical use of VMM-MIB and our SNMP agent. The following URL is one of use cases of our VMM-MIB using cacti. This monitors and shows hypervisors and virtual machines statistics from our SNMP agent deployed to a private cloud platform. http://www2.hongo.wide.ad.jp/cacti/ User Name: ietf Password: 84vancouver (This account will be valid until the end of IETF 84.) Thank you, Hirochika On Jul 30, 2012, at 5:03 PM, Hirochika Asai wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm Hirochika Asai, an implementer of the SNMP agent for hypervisors > and virtual machines. > # posted on July 12, 2012 > > We have submitted an I-D related to our yet another hypervisor MIB. > Please review the following URL for the I-D: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-asai-vmm-mib-00.txt > > I had sent the URL to the MIB definition and our implementation with > libvirt to the mailing list before, but I think you prefer I-D to > personal web pages or repository. Therefore, we've submitted it > though it's after cut-off and during this IETF meeting. > > This I-D include the opinions as an implementer and operator of > hypervisors. The main differences from > and our opinions are summarized > as follows: > > 1. vifIndex > We define vifIndex that is different from the pointers to ifIndex > of IF-MIB and recommended to starting from 1. This is because is > shall be changed on re-initialization of virtual machines. So, we > think vmIfIndex is not resilient to the re-initialization and it is > not good as the index. Moreover, the order of the underlying > interface is not guaranteed to match the order at the virtual > machine. For example, the order mismatches when vnic1 and vnic2 of > the virtual machine can be assigned to tap101(ifIndex=201) and > tap100(ifIndex=200), respectively. > > 2. vstorageEntry > We defined the storage information in vstorageEntry but it does not > include a pointer to hrStorageIndex of HOST-RESOURCES-MIB. This is > because virtual machine's storage is not "host resource" but it is > allocated from host (hypervisor) resource, so we think it is not > appropriate to appear in hrStorageTable. > Open issue: Is it better to define "STORAGE-MIB" that can be commonly > used to all devices (not limited to host resources) like IF-MIB? > > 3. vcpuTable and vcpuAffinityTable > From the viewpoint of the operation of hypervisors and virtual > machines, the utilization of each virtual CPU and the information on > virtual CPU affinity are much informative to optimize CPU pining. > > > We are also deploying our implementation to our cloud. If you are > interested in it, one of the authors attending this IETF can show > you our use and deployment. > > > Thank you, > Hirochika > > -- > Hirochika Asai , The University of Tokyo > > -- Hirochika Asai , The University of Tokyo From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Mon Jul 30 23:26:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC9A521F8628 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 23:26:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.198 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.051, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VhAzawP-g++c for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 23:26:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8553621F8625 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 23:26:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.49]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587FA20BF8; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 08:25:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bZIK84a-YmrA; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 08:25:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAAE020BF5; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 08:25:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id B28DA20FC4FA; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 08:25:57 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 08:25:57 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Hirochika Asai Message-ID: <20120731062557.GB77752@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Hirochika Asai , opsawg@ietf.org References: <9032A714-7304-4A29-82B9-3D2955158925@hongo.wide.ad.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9032A714-7304-4A29-82B9-3D2955158925@hongo.wide.ad.jp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib-00 X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 06:26:01 -0000 On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 05:03:11PM +0900, Hirochika Asai wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm Hirochika Asai, an implementer of the SNMP agent for hypervisors > and virtual machines. > # posted on July 12, 2012 > > We have submitted an I-D related to our yet another hypervisor MIB. > Please review the following URL for the I-D: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-asai-vmm-mib-00.txt > > I had sent the URL to the MIB definition and our implementation with > libvirt to the mailing list before, but I think you prefer I-D to > personal web pages or repository. Therefore, we've submitted it > though it's after cut-off and during this IETF meeting. > > This I-D include the opinions as an implementer and operator of > hypervisors. The main differences from > and our opinions are summarized > as follows: Your MIB module still does not compile. Most of the issues seem fixable. I am appending the output of smilint -s -l4 ./VMM-MIB: ./VMM-MIB:23: [2] invalid format specification `8X-4X-4X-4X-12X' ./VMM-MIB:76: [3] MODULE-IDENTITY clause must be the first declaration in a module ./VMM-MIB:93: [3] revision for last update is missing ./VMM-MIB:281: [2] SMIv2 base type `Counter64' must be imported from SNMPv2-SMI ./VMM-MIB:336: [1] syntax error, unexpected '{', expecting STATUS ./VMM-MIB:342: [1] syntax error, unexpected MAX_ACCESS ./VMM-MIB:352: [1] syntax error, unexpected '{', expecting STATUS ./VMM-MIB:365: [1] syntax error, unexpected MAX_ACCESS ./VMM-MIB:381: [2] SMIv2 base type `Counter64' must be imported from SNMPv2-SMI ./VMM-MIB:449: [1] syntax error, unexpected '{', expecting STATUS ./VMM-MIB:454: [1] syntax error, unexpected MAX_ACCESS ./VMM-MIB:464: [1] syntax error, unexpected '{', expecting STATUS ./VMM-MIB:469: [1] syntax error, unexpected MAX_ACCESS ./VMM-MIB:511: [2] SMIv2 base type `Counter64' must be imported from SNMPv2-SMI ./VMM-MIB:525: [2] SMIv2 base type `Counter64' must be imported from SNMPv2-SMI ./VMM-MIB:556: [2] SMIv2 base type `Counter64' must be imported from SNMPv2-SMI ./VMM-MIB:571: [1] syntax error, unexpected '{', expecting STATUS ./VMM-MIB:576: [1] syntax error, unexpected MAX_ACCESS ./VMM-MIB:585: [2] SMIv2 base type `Counter64' must be imported from SNMPv2-SMI ./VMM-MIB:666: [1] syntax error, unexpected '{', expecting STATUS ./VMM-MIB:673: [1] syntax error, unexpected MAX_ACCESS ./VMM-MIB:833: [2] macro `MODULE-COMPLIANCE' has not been imported from module `SNMPv2-CONF' ./VMM-MIB:842: [2] macro `NOTIFICATION-GROUP' has not been imported from module `SNMPv2-CONF' ./VMM-MIB:856: [2] macro `NOTIFICATION-TYPE' has not been imported from module `SNMPv2-SMI' ./VMM-MIB:866: [1] syntax error, unexpected END, expecting COLON_COLON_EQUAL > 1. vifIndex > We define vifIndex that is different from the pointers to ifIndex > of IF-MIB and recommended to starting from 1. This is because is > shall be changed on re-initialization of virtual machines. So, we > think vmIfIndex is not resilient to the re-initialization and it is > not good as the index. Moreover, the order of the underlying > interface is not guaranteed to match the order at the virtual > machine. For example, the order mismatches when vnic1 and vnic2 of > the virtual machine can be assigned to tap101(ifIndex=201) and > tap100(ifIndex=200), respectively. Not sure I understand this. I guess it boils down to the question whether the MIB is written from the viewpoint of the virtual machines or from the viewpoint of the hypervisor or host system. > 2. vstorageEntry > We defined the storage information in vstorageEntry but it does not > include a pointer to hrStorageIndex of HOST-RESOURCES-MIB. This is > because virtual machine's storage is not "host resource" but it is > allocated from host (hypervisor) resource, so we think it is not > appropriate to appear in hrStorageTable. > Open issue: Is it better to define "STORAGE-MIB" that can be commonly > used to all devices (not limited to host resources) like IF-MIB? Again, the question is the viewpoint here. If you report a size, is it the storage size as seem by the hypervisor or the virtual machine? For sparse files or compressed images, there will be a difference. > 3. vcpuTable and vcpuAffinityTable > From the viewpoint of the operation of hypervisors and virtual > machines, the utilization of each virtual CPU and the information on > virtual CPU affinity are much informative to optimize CPU pining. > > > We are also deploying our implementation to our cloud. If you are > interested in it, one of the authors attending this IETF can show > you our use and deployment. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From melinda.shore@gmail.com Tue Jul 31 07:24:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE1721F8604 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:24:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UAHJwUWVb0se for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:24:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gh0-f172.google.com (mail-gh0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E6721F85D5 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:24:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ghbg16 with SMTP id g16so6554541ghb.31 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:24:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yGJuqS/WPUPS1PDiTrrsfjat1wMSRetFFdYHIL7XPdI=; b=jV4UD0VI0Wwxm3zS5PQrj5TEKgukDNofq6dQLc4MThCGZrQjOwclfueZHMF9yy3e81 ZIuCOG4t/2tZT+LdZJlfMJMGn3lpJTjXRQrJ7bJU8rKtxVJ5b4CSnrEWUD/S5I/CJPYQ xfHNeU9DHBpc4mnvDT1K/9dUBoeUccNeb37dUfN9ga8BxYeVhURU9E0hvqdCr26Ac29R sVj83FTMvjOFW5rIMXfJggl7DFcVhJA48hU91HkipC6eDTljKGrOe1aXCXLc1ACzkSKr c4yaCQurTRGWmE2d9lmWJpiHuYXRimf1IJJA2gLvWiG6pKMZVJ2HPF56Wb/jr6ZxsjsM tusw== Received: by 10.68.224.225 with SMTP id rf1mr44102215pbc.55.1343744666573; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:24:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:df8:0:64:7d71:6822:ec55:469e? ([2001:df8:0:64:7d71:6822:ec55:469e]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pj10sm374391pbb.46.2012.07.31.07.24.24 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:24:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5017EAD1.3030905@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 06:25:21 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: opsawg@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Slides, please! X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:24:27 -0000 If you've got a time slot in our Thursday meeting and haven't already done so, please send your slides. Thanks! Melinda