RE: NetConf Data Modeling Discussion

["Sharon Chisholm" <schishol@nortelnetworks.com>]

Hi

In my view this discussion must include looking at existing work to see what
can be leveraged. CIM would be one of those. We should probably defer the
details of this until the new mailing list is ready.

Sharon



-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Westerinen [mailto:andreaw@cisco.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 1:04 PM
To: 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Faye Ly'; Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH];
'netconf'
Cc: wg-network@dmtf.org
Subject: RE: NetConf Data Modeling Discussion


Could I make a suggestion that we try to blend the DMTF's Common Information
Modeling work into this?  There is a great base of abstractions in CIM
(systems, services, hardware, etc.) and new activities in the Networks WG in
modeling VLANs, VPNs, NAT, Frame Relay, etc.  

We discussed this NetConf thread at the DMTF Networks WG call yesterday
- and want to offer our support and models.  If there are things to change
or add, we are certainly open to that discussion.  

Andrea

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 11:13 AM
To: Faye Ly; Sharon Chisholm; netconf
Subject: RE: NetConf Data Modeling Discussion


Let me add my vote in support of starting this activity as soon as possible.
I never agreed or even understood the 'protocol first' approach taken by
NetConf. In my eyes NetConf will hold a real chance when I will see useful
data models starting to be defined and used. 

Regards,

Dan

(if I am to ramble negatively, SNMP started to fail when the big heads
continued to over-refine the protocol instead of writing useful MIBs for
operators to use. Bur certainly many people will not agree with me).


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org]On 
> Behalf Of Faye Ly
> Sent: 04 February, 2004 8:33 PM
> To: Sharon Chisholm; netconf
> Subject: RE: Netconf Data Modeling Discussion
> 
> 
> Sharon,
> 
> I was not at the Minneapolis meeting but I think this is a great idea.
> 
> It will not only help move forward the netconf but also provides a
> sanity check.
> 
> I would vote for yes for you to go ahead and start the new mailing 
> list.
> 
> -faye
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] 
> On Behalf Of Sharon Chisholm
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 8:20 AM
> To: netconf
> Subject: Netconf Data Modeling Discussion
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> I wasn't able to make it to the Minneapolis meeting, but my
> understanding was there was discussion about setting up a separate 
> mailing list to discuss Netconf data modeling. I think this is an 
> important issue unto itself but there are also potential implications 
> on the base protocol work being done in this working groups that it 
> would be good to identify sooner rather than later.
> 
> I haven't seen an announcement of a new mailing list yet. I've been
> talking with our mailing list people and it looks like we could host 
> such a mailing list. Should I go ahead and get this list created?
> 
> Sharon Chisholm
> Portfolio Integration
> Nortel Networks
> Ottawa, Canada
> 
> --
> 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/>
> 

--
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/>