RE: Draft Agenda (v1) for the Operations & Management Open Area Meeting IETF64

["David B Harrington" <ietfdbh@comcast.net>]

Hi,

I alerted the syslog group (shortly after Simon asked for the topic)
that the discussion was planned for the opsarea meeting, and they
should consider attending. 

They certainly should be notified if the timing changes so they can
attend.

dbh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 6:52 AM
> To: ietfdbh@comcast.net; 'David Kessens'; 'Operations and 
> Management Area'
> Subject: RE: Draft Agenda (v1) for the Operations & 
> Management Open Area Meeting IETF64
> 
> Sounds fine to me.
> 
> David can you move it?
> We should publish that soon, because people may actually
> be checking for these sort of conflicts in first/second
> hals of Open Area meeting. Afetr all, we have a OPS area
> meeting during 2 1-hour slots.
> 
> If we do pick up on Dave's idea, then we (or at least someone)
> should post to syslog what we are doing and that we want them
> in there.
> 
> Bert
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ops-area@ops.ietf.org 
> > [mailto:owner-ops-area@ops.ietf.org]On
> > Behalf Of David B Harrington
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 18:02
> > To: 'David Kessens'; 'Operations and Management Area'
> > Subject: RE: Draft Agenda (v1) for the Operations & 
> > Management Open Area
> > Meeting IETF64
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > The Syslog WG is considering a secure transport, and 
> debating whether
> > to adopt SSH in common with the Netconf and ISMS or to adopt SSL.
> > Therefore,  convergence or non-convergence between Netconf and
ISMS
> > might be important for them to consider.
> > 
> > Syslog is scheduled opposite the second half of the OpsArea
meeting.
> > 
> > I recommend moving the discussion of Netconf/ISMS convergence to
the
> > first half of the agenda, so syslog personnel can participate.
> > 
> > David Harrington
> > dbharrington@comcast.net
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-ops-area@ops.ietf.org 
> > > [mailto:owner-ops-area@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of David Kessens
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 9:13 PM
> > > To: Operations and Management Area
> > > Subject: Draft Agenda (v1) for the Operations & Management 
> > > Open Area Meeting IETF64
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Please see below for our first draft of the Operations & 
> Management
> > > Open Area meeting.
> > > 
> > > Please let us know if you have any comments or additional 
> > > agenda items.
> > > 
> > > David Kessens & Bert Wijnen
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > Draft Agenda (v1) for the Operations & Management Open Area 
> > > Meeting IETF64
> > > 
> > > When:   1740-1950, MONDAY, November 7, 2005
> > > Where:  Salon 2/3
> > > 
> > > A. Administrative stuff
> > >    - appointment of scribe
> > >    - blue sheets
> > >    - agenda bashing
> > >    (David Kessens, Bert Wijnen)
> > > 
> > > B. Proposed working groups
> > > 
> > >    - AAA Maintenance
> > >      (John Loughney, speaker not yet confirmed)
> > >       
> > >    - Diffserv Control Plane Elements (DCPEl)
> > >      (Kathleen Nichols, Scott Bradner)
> > >      
> > >      mailing list: dcpel@ietf.org
> > >      
> > >      archive: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcpel
> > >    
> > >    - MAVS BOF proposal
> > >      (Martin Halstead)
> > > 
> > > C. SNMP/ISMS issues:
> > > 
> > >    - Overlap between SNMP+ISMS/NETCONF
> > >      (Simon Leinen & Andy Bierman - speakers not yet confirmed)
> > > 
> > >      Some people see potential in evolving NETCONF - 
> which currently
> > >      focuses on configuration management - into a more general
> > network
> > >      management protocol, which would subsume much of 
> what SNMP was
> > >      designed for. At the same time, the ISMS (Integrated
Security
> > >      Mechanisms for SNMP) WG is converging towards the same
> > >      connection-oriented underlying transport (SSH) as NETCONF.
> > > 
> > >      Now seems to be a good time to think about the 
> overlap between
> > >      SNMP+ISMS and NETCONF, and whether an effort should be 
> > > made in the
> > >      IETF at unifying the two.
> > >     
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > Y. Open Mike   
> > >    
> > > Z. AOB
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
>