[06:17:47] --- Michael Kirkham has joined
[07:21:51] --- fred has joined
[07:25:07] --- fred has left
[08:04:38] --- mark.ellison has joined
[08:05:31] --- bert has joined
[08:07:12] <Michael Kirkham> good TOD
[08:07:34] --- mtcarrasco has joined
[08:07:56] <bert> are you all listening to the audio?
[08:08:07] --- mark.ellison has left
[08:08:07] * Michael Kirkham is
[08:08:21] --- mark.ellison has joined
[08:08:36] <bert> admin activities now
[08:09:34] <bert> Ron and Scott are note-takers
[08:09:37] --- Bill has joined
[08:10:02] --- sharonchisholm has joined
[08:10:02] <bert> Bert (that is me) is jabber scribe
[08:10:18] <bert> Unless anyone speakas up, I assume you are on audio and have access to the slides
[08:10:26] <Bill> hooray, I was worried
[08:10:32] <bert> slide: wednesday agenda
[08:10:41] <Bill> I am not on audio but just need to know what presentation we're on
[08:10:57] <mark.ellison> Bill we are on agenda
[08:11:27] <bert> at end of meeting ADs want to check if there is support for any of the proposals made in the minibofs (both monday and today)
[08:12:05] <bert> also want to hear your opinion on the usefulness of the mini0BOFs
[08:12:33] <bert> first minibof: Data Modelling by Michael Alexander
[08:13:25] --- lengyel has joined
[08:14:04] <bert> Slide: Use Cases
[08:14:45] <bert> slide: Use Cases II
[08:16:13] <bert> slide: problem statement
[08:17:43] <bert> just in case, slides are here: http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07mar/slides/opsarea-4.ppt
[08:19:25] <bert> slide: Problem Statement II
[08:19:53] <bert> slide: backward compatibility
[08:21:50] <bert> slide: independence from access methods
[08:22:26] <bert> slide: scope: core I
[08:23:36] <bert> slide: Scope: Core II
[08:23:53] --- Bill has left: Computer went to sleep
[08:25:10] --- fred has joined
[08:25:48] --- Bill has joined
[08:26:03] <Bill> I am in the meeting room now
[08:33:36] <bert> slide: Scope: secondary
[08:34:45] --- simon has joined
[08:35:49] <bert> slide: Not in scope
[08:36:27] <bert> slide: requirements and other dependencies
[08:38:31] --- brabson has joined
[08:38:41] <bert> slide: approach talking points
[08:40:15] <bert> slide: process-cycle time
[08:41:59] <bert> slide: open items
[08:43:18] <bert> slide: towards a BOF
[08:44:19] <bert> scott bradner: this OSI etc ??
[08:44:25] <bert> this is not a new concept
[08:44:32] <bert> ebven in IETF it has been thought of
[08:44:38] <bert> it is a big energy sync
[08:44:45] <bert> dm for router policy took forever
[08:44:54] <bert> huge amount of work
[08:45:01] <bert> scott suspects very few uptakers
[08:45:11] <bert> in general we (in IETF) do not understand the concept of NM
[08:45:17] <bert> we are ping and traceroute geeks
[08:45:17] <mark.ellison> Question for Michael: A lot of work has been done in the DMTF on a Common Information Model. What relationships might exist between this proposed work and the DMTF Common Information Model?
[08:45:29] <bert> we have failed for any more elaborate NM work
[08:45:50] <bert> response: this would gibe people the tools to be much more efficient
[08:45:55] <bert> it would be simpler
[08:45:59] <bert> Pekka Savola:
[08:46:07] <bert> this kind of work is more suited as research
[08:46:33] --- atarashi has joined
[08:46:42] <bert> benefit would be for equipment vendors to have to spend less money on this
[08:47:02] <bert> pekka wonders if operators require this
[08:47:09] <bert> answer: the large ones do
[08:47:33] <bert> Sharon: we would benefit in the OPS are with a much more scaled down approach
[08:48:34] <bert> can't keep up with the speed of Sharons words
[08:48:59] <bert> draft has just been posted by Alexander to read some more
[08:49:04] <bert> margaret
[08:49:14] <bert> interesting presentation.
[08:49:28] <bert> not sure which parts would get standardized
[08:49:48] <bert> response:
[08:50:05] <bert> proposal would be to focus on stdardizing the meta models initially
[08:50:27] <bert> we cannot do everything
[08:50:36] <bert> Petri:
[08:50:49] --- ray has joined
[08:50:51] <bert> a similar activity is ongoing in TMF for 5-6 years (SID)
[08:51:11] <bert> after 4 yeras it has a meta-view. to be distributed to domain teams
[08:51:25] <bert> then have view of how to implement in such domains
[08:51:34] <bert> response
[08:51:41] <bert> Alexander knows what SID is doing
[08:51:55] <bert> this proposal here is striking simplicity
[08:52:07] <bert> Dan: discussion of this is worth to be entertained.
[08:52:24] <bert> We may get a BOF
[08:52:44] <bert> Dan proposes to create a separate mlist to discuss this topic
[08:53:11] <bert> version zero of the draft has been submitted, so will show up soon (we expect)
[08:53:59] <bert> list will be opened
[08:54:02] <bert> ----------------------------
[08:54:09] <bert> next mini-bof
[08:55:02] <bert> David Harrington MIB-Doctor-sponsored MIB-document-writing template
[08:55:04] --- miaofuyou has joined
[08:55:23] <bert> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-harrington-text-mib-doc-template-02.txt
[08:55:38] <Michael Kirkham> audio must be ~ 4 minutes behind bert. it's like you're foreseeing the future.
[08:56:00] <bert> it starts right now!
[08:56:10] <bert> slides are not (yet) online
[08:56:27] <bert> dbh connecting to projector
[08:56:42] <bert> there should be silence on the audio now
[08:56:53] <bert> dbh starts talking now
[08:57:03] <bert> mib-document template
[08:57:04] <mark.ellison> about 10 sec delay
[08:57:23] <Michael Kirkham> just talking about setting up list for previous BOF on my feed
[08:57:38] <bert> slide 1
[08:57:47] <bert> purpose of MI doctors
[08:58:11] <bert> slide has points on what and why we have MIB doctor reviews
[08:58:13] <Michael Kirkham> restarted. now hear DH.
[08:58:55] --- mtcarrasco has left
[08:59:03] <bert> IESG performance on MIB document needs to be improved.
[08:59:25] <bert> MIB doctor review sofar seem to take too lonmg (months)
[08:59:28] <bert> next slide
[08:59:35] <bert> CLRs (Crappy Little Rules)
[08:59:45] --- m_ersue has joined
[08:59:59] <bert> result ws thta MIB dcotors created MIB review guidelines (RFC4181)
[09:00:16] <bert> it has improved quality of reviews
[09:00:18] <bert> next slide
[09:00:30] <bert> what causes long review times?
[09:01:07] <bert> we needs tools toautomate document quality to improve speeds of reviews
[09:01:18] <bert> next slide
[09:01:24] <bert> how to reduce review times
[09:01:36] <bert> - templates for authors
[09:01:59] <bert> so that we get more consistent documents tahat we can review faster
[09:02:34] <bert> speicifically w.r.t. standard sections and boiler plate text etc
[09:02:55] <bert> the template will have upo date boilerplate etc
[09:03:27] <bert> xml2rfc (template in that format available too) helps even more
[09:03:59] <bert> template does not provide a tool to do MIB module editing.
[09:04:10] <bert> people want to develop the MIB module itself in different ways
[09:04:27] <bert> Emile has developed XML2RFC template for MIB editing (next presentation)
[09:06:10] <bert> email ietfdbh@comcast.net if you want a copy of latest template
[09:06:27] <bert> Next presentation: Emile Stephan (Hope I have spelling correct)
[09:07:08] <bert> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stephan-ops-xml-mib-module-template-00.txt
[09:08:12] <bert> slides: http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07mar/slides/opsarea-5.ppt
[09:08:33] <bert> slide: problem statements 1/3
[09:12:40] <bert> slide: problem statements 2/3
[09:15:20] <bert> slide: problem statements 3/3
[09:16:08] <bert> slide experimentation woth PCE-DISC-MIB 1/4
[09:16:12] --- ray_atarashi has joined
[09:16:27] --- ray has left
[09:16:59] <bert> slide experimentation woth PCE-DISC-MIB 2/4
[09:17:37] <bert> slide experimentation woth PCE-DISC-MIB 3/4
[09:18:14] <bert> slide experimentation woth PCE-DISC-MIB 4/4
[09:18:26] --- j.schoenwaelder@jabber.eecs.iu-bremen.de has joined
[09:18:57] <bert> slide: benefis 1/4
[09:19:02] <bert> slide: benefis 2/4
[09:20:15] <bert> slide: benefis 3/4
[09:21:04] <bert> slide: benefis 4/4
[09:21:08] <bert> oops
[09:21:16] <bert> slide: proposal 1/5
[09:21:30] <bert> slide: proposal 2/5
[09:22:18] <bert> slide: proposal 3/5
[09:22:57] <bert> slide: proposal 4/5
[09:23:25] <bert> slide: proposal 5/5
[09:23:39] <bert> end of slides
[09:23:46] <bert> discussion
[09:24:02] <bert> Sharon: do you ave tools to translate xml into a MIB
[09:24:11] --- m_ersue has left
[09:25:02] <Michael Kirkham> FYI: with the schema I wrote, our tools can go XML <--> SMI. both directions, and this schema is freely available for any use. I don't see the usefulness of this schema.
[09:25:58] <Michael Kirkham> (wrote with input of Juergen et. al.)
[09:25:58] <bert> stephan shows an example of how you define an object in XML
[09:26:38] <bert> he also shows an error in edit phase when using incorrect object type (syntax)
[09:27:11] <bert> bill fenner: this is the wrong way to model a MIB in XML
[09:27:22] <bert> you rtransform uses xSL in an awkward way
[09:27:45] <bert> it would be better andm more xml-y to have an element ....
[09:27:57] <bert> or an real XML schema for writing a MIB module
[09:27:58] <sharonchisholm> my new favourite word is xmly
[09:28:59] * Michael Kirkham agrees with bill - the schema is basically tags for indentation, and it's otherwise just SMI plaintext
[09:29:02] <bert> staphan: pls write a better proposal
[09:29:15] <bert> Juergen Schoenwaelder
[09:29:24] <bert> people can write MIB modules as they wish
[09:29:42] <bert> but juergen worries about more protocol independent data model
[09:30:02] <bert> translation is not easy and does not work as we found out in earlier efforts
[09:30:16] <bert> naming is the niggest problem
[09:30:34] <bert> spehphan: agree. the BOF was requested to see if there are other proposals
[09:30:40] <bert> Dan: so you got some feedback
[09:30:47] <bert> pls continue discussion on the list
[09:31:09] <bert> Dan: as a contributor: this is not ready/subject for standardization at this time
[09:31:50] <bert> Dan invites comments on opsarea mailing list
[09:32:30] <bert> nest topic --------------
[09:32:42] <bert> http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07mar/slides/opsarea-6.ppt
[09:33:31] <bert> VLAN datamodel for Netconf
[09:34:14] <bert> tomoyuki Lijima
[09:34:18] <bert> slide 2
[09:34:22] <bert> goals
[09:34:46] --- Bill has left: Computer went to sleep
[09:34:59] <bert> slide 3: netconf data model
[09:36:05] <bert> document: draft-iijima-ngo-vlandatamodel-00.txt
[09:36:13] <bert> slide 4: benefits
[09:37:15] <bert> slide 5: things to be considered...
[09:37:52] <bert> slide 6: network functions to be modeled
[09:38:32] <bert> slide 7: configuration data ..
[09:39:20] <bert> slide 8: vlan's UML class diagram
[09:40:40] <bert> slide 9: VLAN's APIs generated from UML
[09:41:41] <bert> slide 10: VLANs XML Schema ... xasd format (1/4)
[09:42:16] <bert> slide 14: Expected issue in the NGO WG
[09:43:17] <bert> slide 15: Comparison between XSD and Relax NG
[09:44:20] <bert> slide 16: Netconf application example
[09:45:59] <bert> slide 17: implementation example
[09:46:41] <bert> slide 18: example continued
[09:47:03] <bert> slide 19: proposal to INTAP/OSMIC
[09:47:14] <bert> skip slide
[09:47:20] <bert> slide 20: conmclusion
[09:47:36] <bert> Q&A
[09:47:48] <bert> Sharon: why did you select VLAN as one of the 1st dms
[09:48:04] <bert> answer: vlamn is mosed used technology in enterprise network
[09:48:13] <bert> s/valmn/vlan/
[09:48:39] <bert> Dan: vlan config is one of the MIB modules that are being used with read-write capabilities in enterprise space
[09:48:50] <bert> so helps to compare SNMP to Netconf for config
[09:49:19] <bert> pekka: was the string "port" redundant ?
[09:49:45] <bert> why not just portumber?
[09:50:01] <bert> answer: number is required
[09:50:05] <bert> clarify offline
[10:42:12] --- LOGGING STARTED
[10:43:57] --- m_ersue has joined
[10:44:07] --- m_ersue has left
[10:45:13] --- harald has joined
[10:45:49] --- harald has left
[10:46:11] --- mark.ellison has joined
[10:46:20] --- simon.leinen has joined
[10:51:23] --- ray_atarashi has joined
[10:58:30] --- ray_atarashi has left
[11:04:08] --- amayer has joined
[11:05:28] --- amayer has left
[11:10:47] --- mark.ellison has left
[11:11:02] --- simon.leinen has left
[11:38:35] --- Michael Kirkham has joined
[11:40:50] --- Michael Kirkham has left
[17:09:40] --- brabson has joined
[17:09:48] --- brabson has left