Ops Area Discussion Management Interface Refinement Thomas Nadeau Dan Romascanu IETF 84 - Vancouver 1

Motivation Management Interface Requirements for WGs Evolution Evolve Guidance to and assistance for WGs Update to RFC1052 2

What Are The Issues? Management requirements for WGs have not evolved for some time. – SNMP writes Need to evolve for all relevant interfaces A need of per-workgroup tailoring – Ops “assistant” when relevant – Adjust charter to meet needs of WG and have sufficient OPS work items. 3

Update to RFC1052 history has a historical introduction of its own, hot it is itself (ancient) history, What happened since (demise of CMIP, evolution of SNMP), RFC 3535, NETCONF and YANG 1052 had the concept of a 'short term' solution (SNMP) migrating to a 'long term solution' (CMI) using the same MIB. Why does not this work? 4

Rfc1052 con’t No one 'protocol fits all' solution is possible. No one data model can efficiently support multiple protocols. – ‘It’s not only about SNMP and MIBs any longer’ Risk - 'Short term' becomes 'permanently' as the Internet permanently expands and needs to be managed as a collection of autonomous systems deployed at different layers Internet management 5

Conclusions/Next Steps Update 1052 – Clean the historical balast – Adopt the an operational toolset/multiprotocol approach – Include broader architectural view Goals and Interaction between management protocols and OAM protocols IESG discussion with WGs 6