RE: Callhome draft?

["David B Harrington" <dbharrington@comcast.net>]

Hi,

It is unclear from your message just which proposal you refer to when
saying Juergen presented a solution. I have seen a number of porposals
considered in ISMS that relate to callhome, but none so far that solve
all the problems.

I don't believe that Juergen's proposal has been accepted by the ISMS
WG yet. There is ongoing discussion about multiple approaches to
session reuse and callhome functionality and data access controls that
are related.

As editor of the TMSM and SSHSM WG drafts, I believe the current
consensus in ISMS is to permit session reuse regardless of whether the
session was created as a R/R session or a notification session, in
order to support a callhome functionality, if we can resolve the
security issues presented by a client-server transport session versus
the SNMPv3/VACM security requirements.  

Stay tuned, but the ISMS "solution" is not yet ready to be the basis
of the Netconf WG solution.

David Harrington
dharrington@huawei.com 
dbharrington@comcast.net
ietfdbh@comcast.net


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Balazs Lengyel
> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 3:22 AM
> To: Andy Bierman
> Cc: Netconf (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: Callhome draft?
> 
> Hello,
> On the IETF Jurgen in the ISMS group presented a solution. Do 
> you propose we base our 
> solution on that one? I feel it would be good. He had some 
> problems with security but I 
> believe those can be solved.
> Balazs
> 
> Andy Bierman wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I was wondering if anyone is willing to be the Editor/author
> > of 2 drafts to fully specify the Callhome feature for both
> > BEEP and SSH.  I don't know if this would be Informational,
> > Experimental, or standards track.
> > 
> > If done correctly, not one sentence in the protocol or
notification
> > drafts will be impacted by the Callhome feature.
> > 
> > IMO, the "southbound interface" for Callhome is 
> application-independent,
> > and should work the same for any protocol mapping to SSH or BEEP
> > (BEEP already has this part).  The "northbound interface" of the
> > Callhome mechanism is protocol-specific, and a mapping to NETCONF
> > is needed. (NETCONF over BEEP already has this part.)
> > 
> > I think there was interest at the Callhome BOF in a generic
> > solution, but I hope this doesn't mean the problem will
> > be abstracted so far away nobody ever works on it.
> > 
> > 
> > thanks,
> > Andy
> > 
> > -- 
> > to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
> > the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> > archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>
> 
> -- 
> Balazs Lengyel                       Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
> TSP System Manager
> ECN: 831 7320                        Fax: +36 1 4377792
> Tel: +36-1-437-7320     email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com
> 
> --
> to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
> the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>
> 


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