RE: no more milestones?

[<neil.2.harrison@bt.com>]

Thomas D. Nadeau Sent: 18 July 2005 14:06
> On Jul 18, 2005, at 9:00 AM, Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be wrote:
> 
> >
> > hi adrian
> >
> >
> >> I would like to see:
> >> - a refinement of the charter to focus the next work items
> >> - a year's worth of milestones to ensure we stay focused.
> >>
> >> On the other hand, we should aim to close down CCAMP and move the
> >> work to
> >> other or new working groups.
> >>
> >
> > coupling both sentences does it mean in your view
> >
> > 1) define several short-term milestones for refining topics that  
> > have been
> > already initiated and requires further well scoped attention
> >
> > 2) (brand) new topics should target new working groups - as already
> > initiated with L1VPN for inst. - or existing working groups
> >
> > nevertheless, i do not see why this automatically means 
> CCAMP can not
> > remain the focal point concerning *base* GMPLS signaling and routing
> > protocols
> 
>      I agree. There are for instance, ops/management-related items
> for "base" CCAMP items that need to be worked on.  The question
> for me is why can't we continue to work on these?  I thought
> these things were automatic chartered items, and thus should
> be ongoing work items.
> 
>      --Tom
NH=> You are right Tom to raise the point about the importance of
network management here.  When we are dealing with large BW granularity
co-cs mode technologies then virtually all the really important issues
are concerned with the efficacy of the management-plane solution....the
control-plane plays a minor support role (for a whole raft of
technical/commercial/operational reasons).  This is of course quite the
opposite to a cl-ps layer network like IP.  We look to TMF for expertise
here in developing the required management information models which are
based on functional architecture.

regards, Neil
> 
> 
> >
> > thanks,
> > - dimitri.
> >
> 
>