[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Draft Minutes



Here is a draft of the minutes from our meeting in Yokohama.  Sorry
they are a bit late -- I was on vacation for the past two weeks.

Please let me know if there are any questions or comments.  I plan
to submit then on Friday.

Thanks,
Margaret


XML Configuration BOF [xmlconf]
Monday, July 15th, 1300-1500
=============================== 

CHAIR

Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>

DESCRIPTION

There is significant interest in the use of XML-based technologies
to manage and configure IP-based networks and networking equipment.
This BOF will discuss the high-level requirements for a network
configuration mechanism, and will explore how the existing 
proprietary and standards-based XML technologies, such SOAP, WBEM 
and SyncML, could be used to meet those requirements.  Based on 
that discussion, we will determine whether we should pursue any
IETF work in this area.

AGENDA

- Introduction and Agenda Bashing -- Margaret (10 min)

- Requirements Discussion 
          - Operator Needs 
                  -- Weijing Chen (10 min)
                  -- Ron Bonica (10 min)
          - Use of Metadata in XML Configuration -- Ray Atarashi (10 min)
          - Requirements Strawman -- Margaret (15 min)

- Survey of Existing Technologies -- Margaret (15 min)
          - SOAP
          - WBEM & CIM/XML
          - SyncML
          - Juniper

- Conversion of MIB Data Model to XML -- Andy Bierman (15 min)

- Discuss Further IETF Work (35 min)

                   
READING LIST

Related Internet-Drafts:

Concepts and Requirements for XML Network Configuration            
http://www.ietf.org/internet-dafts/draft-wasserman-xmlcomf-req-00.txt  

Towards XML Based Management and Configuration
http://www.ietf.org/internet-dafts/draft-goddard-xmlconf-survey.txt 

Guidelines for the Use of XML within IETF Protocols
http://www.ietf.org/internet-dafts/draft-hollenbeck-ietf-xml-guidelines-05.txt

Network Management Observations 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-dafts/draft-bierman-nm-observations-00.txt 


Other Useful Pointers:

XML
http://www.w3.org/XML

SOAP
http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/

WBEM & CIM/XML
http://www.dmtf.org

SyncML
http://www.syncml.org/

JUNOScript
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos53/


DISCUSSION MINUTES

Intro & Agenda Bashing:
	No agenda changes.

Requirements Discussion:
	Operator Needs:

	Weijing Chen presented overview of his needs (see slides).

	Summary:  A common XML schema would allow disparate
		backend systems to interface the networking
		equipment in a uniform fashion.

	Ron Bonica discussed his use of Juniper's XML configuration
	facility.  

	Summary:  The XML facility in Juniper is accessed through
		a CLI front-end.  Both the CLI server and the 
		XML server run on the box and communicate with
		each other.  Also possible to access the XML
		server directly.

		For more information about Ron's work with Juniper
		products, see the notes from the Ops Area open
		meeting.

	Discussion:  Questions raised about the assumption that
		XML would be used for access to SNMP data.  Does
		SNMP really have access to all the data that is
		needed, etc.  A: SNMP is being used for these 
		things now, and XML would provide a more consistent
		way to access it.

	Use of metadata in XML configuration:

	Summary:  Ray Atarashi presented her research into metadata
		and its applicability to configuration systems (see
		slides).

	Requirements Strawman:

	Summary:  Margaret Wasserman presented the requirements
		strawman with an emphasis on open issues and
		questions (see slides).

	Discussion:  

	Question:  Change notification is out of scope? A: no, it is in the 
	requirements. However, as few mwchanisms as possible need to 
	be built at once. Open for discussion

	Comment: why use XML? Just to have XML inside? A: XML as a 
	data representation method has advantage to be human readable 
	and machine parsable

	Comment: need to define first what is the problem to be solved 

	Rob Austein: At the IAB NM workshop requirements were 
	enumerated. On Thursday there will be a presentation on this 
	in the IAB Plenary

	Dave Harrington: The SNMP framework document explains the 
	components of a management solution. This model can be used 
	in order to decide what XML can be used for A: Not the goal
	to reinvent SNMP in XML.

	Dave Perkins: Two ways of presenting the info - DDT and schema

	Collin Jenings: Why would the solutions isomorphic with 
	SNMP? There are some other requirements that need to be addresses
	such as revision control and change synchronization.  Margaret: Can 
	you send details to the list?

	Randy Bush:  Agrees. Need for transaction model. Where does XML
	give leverage over these items?

	Internationalized strings - need volunteers to contribute to
	requirements in this area.

	Security - need to understand what requirements actually are.

	Steve Bellovin: authorization and operational model needs to be 
	defined. What needs to be secured?  Do we need object security,
	or just transport security?

	Randy Preshun: on previous point of transaction modeling - 
	draft-preshun-webdav... talks about a number of these 
	issues plus about security model.

	Eliot - Many vendors do some form of XML configuration, they are 
	doing it differently, need a minimal level of interoperability 
	M: would like to start with the transport, but other people would 
	like to define a schema first

	Eric:  Why would it have to be XML data? Any data could be sent over
	a secure channel.  M: might be useful to put some formatting 
	so that a client do some diff-ing and know what pieces of info to deal 
	with. XML-izing the SNMP might be in the minds of some people

	Peter Laufberg (runs a "small" network): want to talk to 
	network elements as a human being; also wants machine 
	language to talk to routers from management system; using 
	XML seems to do the job; make it secure

	Harald - there are specifications to translate between languages. 
	This is not the issue. Focus on making the language useful for 
	configuration. Easy things should be easy, hard things should be
	possible.

	Dave Durham - using MIBs is polluting the data model because of 
	the lack of a transactional model

	Sharon Chisholm: SNMP will still be used for monitoring thus need 
	to do some mapping between XML and SNMP

	Will an XML data model be easier to instrument? To be worth-while 
	and gain acceptance, needs to be extensible and cheap to implement

	Shy Herzog - nice to monitor things that we configure, configuration 
	needs to say if transaction is done, this is not monitoring by 
	transactional configuration

	Comment: disagrees that configuration can be done the same for short 
	lived configuration and provisioning

	Other data representation? - would be subject of a separate BOF

	Randy Bush:  Should be discussing schema,not transport!
  
[Discussion was cut-off to allow presentations to continue]

Skipped over survey presentation, due to time pressure (see 
slides if interested).

Conversion of MIB Data Model to XML:

	Andy Bierman presented ideas about this conversion (see
	slides).

Discussion continued on whether to define a transport, define a 
schema or do both.  Further discussion of how/if XML helps to 
make any of this easier or more useful for operators.

No consensus was reached during the meeting about how/if work
in this area should continue in the IETF.

Ran out of time, with discussion to be continued in the Ops
Area open meeting.
  







--
to unsubscribe send a message to xmlconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlconf/>