Re: [OPSAWG] review of draft-schoenw-opsawg-copspr-historic-00.txt

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder at jacobs-university.de>]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:48:47AM +0200, David Harrington wrote:
>  
> 
> > > s/the associated YANG data modeling language [YANG]/an associated
> > > XML-based data modeling language [YANG]./
> > 
> > I am not sure what "XML-based" means nor do I think this information
> > is necessary. I prefer:
> > 
> > /an associated data modeling language called YANG [YANG]/
> 
> Your paragraph is about the IAB Workshop documented in RFC3535, and
> apparently is there
> to explain why Netconf and YANG are the (OPS) preferred alternatives:
>    An IAB Network Management Workshop held in 2002 [RFC3535] lead to
> the
>    creation of the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) [RFC4741]
>    and the associated YANG data modeling language [YANG].  These new
>    protocols are specifically designed to match the needs of network
>    operators and all configuration management related efforts in the
>    IETF are now centered on NETCONF and YANG.
> 
> RFC3535 reports:
>    4.  The workshop recommends, with strong consensus from both
> protocol
>        developers and operators, that the IETF focus resources on the
>        standardization of configuration management mechanisms.
> 
>    5.  The workshop recommends, with strong consensus from the
> operators
>        and rough consensus from the protocol developers, that the
>        IETF/IRTF should spend resources on the development and
>        standardization of XML-based device configuration and
> management
>        technologies (such as common XML configuration schemas,
> exchange
>        protocols and so on).
> 
> Your paragraph tries to explain why Netconf and YANG are preferred
> over COPS-PR, but I think more needs to be said about which operators'
> needs are met, and how these alternatives meet the requirements
> described in RFC3535. There are people who think COPS-PR is useful,
> and we should explain why Netconf/YANG should be used rather than
> COPS-PR. 
> 
> I suggest:
> 
>    An IAB Network Management Workshop held in 2002 [RFC3535] led to
> the
>    creation of the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) [RFC4741]
>    and an associated XML-based data modeling language [YANG].  These
> new
>    protocols are specifically designed to meet the recommendations of
> the
>    workshop to address the needs of network operators:
>    - Netconf standardizes configuration management mechanisms, and
> uses an 
>    Extensible Markup Language (XML)-based data encoding for the
> configuration 
>    data as well as the protocol messages.
>    - YANG focuses on a limited problem space -  expressing NETCONF
> data models, 
>    not arbitrary XML documents or arbitrary data models.  The data
> models
>    described by YANG are designed to be easily operated upon by
> NETCONF
>    operations. YANG modules can be translated into an XML format
> called YANG
>    Independent Notation (YIN), allowing applications using
>    XML parsers and XSLT scripts to operate on the models. 
> 
> (I do think we should have a bit of discussion of the technical
> reasons why COPS-PR was considered NOT RECOMMENDED - the global lock,
> non-deterministic clients, etc.)
> 
> > So what was your proposal? What about this:
> > 
> >         [...] configuration management related efforts in the IETF
> >         operations and management area are now centered on NETCONF
> and
> >         YANG.
> 
> How about 
> [...] device configuration management efforts in the IETF Operations
> and Management Area are now centered on NETCONF and YANG. Other areas 
> of the IETF are considering the NETCONF/YANG solution plus other
> possible 
> alternatives for configuration of their technologies.

Thanks for your input. I have taken up some suggestions, others I have
left out other that I think are not relevant for declaring COPS-PR and
friends historic or where the added terminology remains unclear or
open to interpretation. I am posting a new revision so we can
synchronize.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>