FW: [nmrg] RE: Proposed IETF Working Group: sming

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Copying this to sming list

> ----------
> From: 	Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Reply To: 	sming@ops.ietf.org
> Sent: 	Thursday, October 26, 2000 9:07 PM
> To: 	new-work; Dave Sidor
> Cc: 	David Perkins; Andrea Westerinen; Dan Romascanu; mibs; rap; nim;
> Network Management Research Group
> Subject: 	RE: [nmrg] RE: Proposed IETF Working Group: sming
> 
> Dave, I am answering this email... but please for further 
> discussions, use sming@ops.ietf.org. To subscribe, send
> email to majordomo@psg.org, in body say: subscribe sming
> 
> Dave, if you want to discuss this further with OPS ADs or IESG
> in general, then of course you can also send email to Rany and/or
> myself and/or to the iesg@ietf.org mailing list.
> 
> The Information Modeling you talk about is a topic of the NIM BOF.
> That work has not been defined well enough yet to start a new WG.
> We are proposing to move SMI forward to address some of the
> issues that have been raised in the last so many years.
> 
> Your input for both NIM discussions and for the potential sming WG
> are of course very wellcome.
> 
> Below, I see that your focus is on CMIP and CORBA.
> Our focus for now is on SNMP and COPS.
> 
> During the NIM BOF, I heard a lot of scepticism about the feasibility
> of trying to define one Information Model that would be able to 
> handle all the different technologies and at the same time be
> compatible with all the exitsing models.
> 
> Bert
> 
> > ----------
> > From: 	Dave Sidor[SMTP:djsidor@nortelnetworks.com]
> > Sent: 	Thursday, October 26, 2000 7:27 PM
> > To: 	new-work
> > Cc: 	David T. Perkins; Andrea Westerinen; Dan Romascanu; mibs;
> rap; nim;
> > Network Management Research Group
> > Subject: 	Re: [nmrg] RE: Proposed IETF Working Group: sming
> > 
> > For your information, several years ago standards bodies involved in
> > telecom management also recognized the need for the "definition of a
> > transport-independent information information model so as to allow a
> > variety of implementation-specific technologies to be derived from a
> > single definition." This need was driven by advances in technologies
> > applicable to telecom management, in fact to the management of networks
> > of any description, and market pressures to take advantage of these
> > advances.
> > 
> > More specifically, ITU-T Study Group 4, which is responsible for the
> > Telecommunication Management Network (TMN) framework, information
> > models, and protocols,  recently approved a revised TMN interface
> > specification methodology in Recommendation M.3020 based on the
> > following principles:
> > 
> > - requirements need to be understandable to telecom management experts
> > and yet provide sufficient detail to drive information modeling
> > 
> > - information model details must be traceable to requirement details
> > 
> > - information definitions must be defined independent of deployment (ie
> > implementation) technology
> > 
> > - industrial strength graphical methods and tools should be used, with
> > an initial focus on OMG-approved Unified Modeling Language (UML)
> > notations, including use case, class structure, sequence, collaboration,
> > activity, and implementation diagrams as well as state charts
> > 
> > - support for CMIP and CORBA environments should be provided initially
> > 
> > This work was supported by related regional and national standards
> > bodies, such as ETSI and T1, and built upon related work in the
> > TeleManagement Forum.
> > 
> > The role of M.3020 in TMN was described during the TMN SNMP BOF held at
> > the IETF March meeting in Adelaide and related information from that
> > BOF, including a copy of M.3020-2000, is available via ftp as follows:
> > 
> > IP Address: 47.234.32.16
> > UserID: anonymous
> > Path: /itu_to_ietf/SG4
> > 
> > Any comments on the above are of course welcome.
> > 
> > Dave Sidor
> > Chairman, ITU-T SG 4
> > djsidor@nortelnetworks.com
> > 
>