XML WG scope

["Chen, Weijing" <wchen@tri.sbc.com>]

 

 

 

Quote from previous email:

The charter that Ted proposed makes much more sense, and will result in some amount of standards-based configuration management.

...which will likely be as widely ignored by operators as the current SNMP approach, because it doesn't solve the problems that many operators are saying they have today.

I have this wacky idea that the IETF ought to tackle the OPS/NM problems that many operators say they have -- rather than tackling the OPS/NM problems that IETF folks think are interesting but lack widespread current operator interest. Please forgive me for being consumer oriented.

 

[Chen, Weijing]: Our problem is the N^2 interfaces problem, pure and simple. I don't how the IETF gauges the operator request. Certainly, as a service operator, we are not thinking in the way that you mention. Of course, SBC may not be counted as service operator and customer in your book. Your mileage varies.

 

 

--

Weijing Chen

SBC Technology Resources

9505 Arboretum Blvd.

Austin, TX 78759

512 372 5710

wchen@tri.sbc.com