[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-farrel-rtg-manageability-requirements-00.txt



Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 08:47:14PM -0500, David B Harrington wrote:
 
  
I disagree that the S in FCAPS manageability is already addressed by
Security Considerations.
Considering security for a technology and for the security of the
management of the technology are different topics.
    

I am not sure the S if FCAPS is restricted to "Management Security".
Having said that, I do not believe that structuring the management
considerations section according to FCAPS is terrible useful. I think
this section is only useful if it is short and sharp and explains
in very abstract terms which management activities are envisioned
for a given protocol or how a protocol fits into existing management
infrastructures.
  
I didn't understand this section as "which management activities are envisioned for a given protocol or how a protocol fits into existing management infrastructures", but as a way to suggest/strongly suggest/impose (*) that the protocol manageability would be thought of from day one. And to make sure ALL the manageability aspects would be thought of, I suggested FCAPS

(*) choose what you want.

Regards, Benoit.
/js