Comparing Approaches to NETCONF Modeling (CANMOD) BOF Time: 09:00-11:30 Date: Wednesday, March 12th, 2008 Location: Franklin 11/12 Chair: Randy Presuhn Discussion: On the NETCONF Goes On list (ngo@ietf.org) Summary: The NETCONF Working Group has completed a base protocol to be used for configuration management. The current specifications do not include a modeling language or accompanying rules for how to model management information to be configured and monitored using NETCONF. A data modeling framework is needed to support ongoing development of IETF and vendor-defined management information modules. The goal of the BOF is to determine whether there is sufficient interest and cohesion to form a working group to standardize a data modeling language for NETCONF. The BOF will discuss and assess data modeling requirements and use cases for NETCONF documented by design teams in the form of internet drafts. Specific proposals documented as internet drafts will be used to explain the potential technical consequences of meeting specific proposed requirements. The target is for the BOF to recommend how NETCONF data modeling work should procede. Design teams collected, clarified and categorized requirements for a data modeling language from a broad group of IETF participants. Many of these requirements have broad agreement. These requirements, and a collection of use-cases motivating the requirements where broad agreement was not reached, are documented in Internet Drafts. Design teams have also prepared annotated examples of instance documents to illustrate many of the requirements. All BOF participants are expected to read these documents and to understand the basic concepts of the NETCONF protocol. In order to ensure productive discussion, the BOF chairs will only grant agenda time to discuss requirements and illustrative proposals which have been made available in internet drafts. Discussion will focus on gaining clarity about the requirements and the use cases. As time permits, we will also look at whether and how the specific proposals address the requirements and use cases. Though the BOF's initial focus will be on the discussion and validation of the requirements gathered, it is expected that this will lead to discussions within the NETCONF community of the technology implications of the requirements and to a comparison of specific solution proposals. Input Documents: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-linowski-netconf-dml-requirements-01.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-presuhn-rcdml-03.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xiao-evaluate-dml-01.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chisholm-netconf-model-08.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bjorklund-yang-requirements-00.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ersue-netconf-kalua-dml-00.txt (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ersue-netconf-kalua-dml-01.txt) http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mahy-canmod-dsdl-00.txt (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mahy-canmod-dsdl-01.txt) http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bjorklund-netconf-yang-02.txt Note Well: Participants are expected to have read the input documents and to be familiar with the NETCONF protocol (RFC 4741). There is much to discuss, so no time will be spent on tutorial material. AGENDA: 1. Administrative matters (10 minutes) 1.1 introductions 1.2 selection of minute-taker PLEASE read http://www.ietf.org/instructions/minutes.html volunteers PRIOR to the meeting greatly appreciated! 1.3 selection of jabber scribe(s) volunteers PRIOR to the meeting greatly appreciated! 1.4 circulation of sign-up sheet 1.5 Review of Agenda 1.6 Adjustment of time allocations 2. Highlights of Requirements (These presentations should focus on a small number of high-impact issues, rather than attempting to cover everything.) Discussion limited to clarifying questions. (one hour - twenty minutes maximum for each draft) 2.1 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-linowski-netconf-dml-requirements-01.txt 2.2 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-presuhn-rcdml-03.txt 2.3 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xiao-evaluate-dml-01.txt 3. Detailed examples of how key requirements are addressed by specific proposals: Discussion limited to clarifying questions. (one hour - fifteen minutes maximum for each draft) 3.1 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chisholm-netconf-model-08.txt 3.2 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bjorklund-yang-requirements-00.txt 3.3 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ersue-netconf-kalua-dml-00.txt (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ersue-netconf-kalua-dml-01.txt) 3.4 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mahy-canmod-dsdl-00.txt (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mahy-canmod-dsdl-01.txt) 3.5 (iff time permits) http://people.su.se/~leifj/draft-johansson-netconf-owl-00.txt 4. Discussion. (Twenty-five minutes, plus any needed unused time from above.) 5. Getting a sense of the room - a little humming: (10 minutes) 5.1 Are the requirements adequately understood? 5.2 Is there a need for this work? 5.3 Is there sufficient agreement on the requirements to permit progress? 5.4 Should an IETF working group be formed? 5.5 Would additional time spent on requirements gathering and analysis be well-spent? 6. Wrap-up (5 minutes) 6.1 review of action items 6.2 reminders to minute-takers and presenters PLEASE read http://www.ietf.org/instructions/minutes.html and http://www.ietf.org/instructions/slides.html, respectively. http://www.ietf.org/instructions/meeting_materials.html 6.3 retrieval of sign-up sheet