Subject: [eman] Way forward for EMAN Framework

From: Bruce Nordman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 15:14:21 -0700

As my previous email noted, and as per Juergen Quittek's recent review
  http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/eman/current/msg02007.html
there are still many many outstanding problems with the
current Framework draft.  This draft has been out for consideration
and evolving for over three years, so having so many outstanding
problems is troubling.  The the pace of improvement over these
years has been quite slow.  It seems unlikely that continuing on
the process of trying to fix this document will lead to it being
suitable as an RFC in a reasonable timeframe.  It would be better
to produce no result than to produce a substandard one.

That said, there are alternatives.  One good one is to use the
"Energy Reporting (ER) Framework" -- draft-nordman-eman-er-framework-01
-- as the basis for the framework work item from EMAN.  A key next
step is for that draft to receive critical review by EMAN participants
to directly compare it to the current EMAN Framework draft.  This
would productively move EMAN forward.

My assessment of the two is that the ER Framework:
* Is simpler to read and understand - for a variety of audiences
* Will be simpler to implement (for end devices and management systems)
* Lacks many ambiguities present in the EMAN Framework
* More fully and directly implements the EMAN Requirements
* Has features and capabilities not in the EMAN Framework
These all make it more suitable as an RFC and more likely to be
successful as a standard.

EMAN is not the only organization considering energy management
data models and so to be successful will need to be clearly superior
to alternatives.

I look forward to more detailed and productive discussion on the list.
Thank you,

--Bruce

-- 
*Bruce Nordman*
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
*nordman.lbl.gov*
[email-masked]
510-486-7089
m: 510-501-7943

---

From: Ted Ghose <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 00:18:29 +0000

Why not fix the existing one rather starting a discussion on a new draft? Something I missed?

Thanks

-tg-
Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 2, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Bruce Nordman <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

--Bruce

--
Bruce Nordman
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
nordman.lbl.gov<http://nordman.lbl.gov>
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
510-486-7089
m: 510-501-7943
_______________________________________________
eman mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman

---

From: Nevil Brownlee <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 10:02:54 +1300

Hi Bruce:

It's good to see some useful feedback from the Framework draft's
WGLC, especially feedback that includes suggestions for improved
text.

However, the notion of "starting again" is unhelpful.  Let me remind
you of what the EMAN WG's charter says about the framework:

   2. Energy management framework.
   The EMAN WG will create a framework document that will describe
   extensions to current management framework, required for energy
   management. This includes: power and energy monitoring, power states,
   power state control, and potential power state transitions. The
   framework will focus on energy management for IP-based network
   equipment (routers, switches, PCs, IP cameras, phones and the like).
   Particularly, the relationships between reporting devices, remote
   devices, and monitoring probes (such as might be used in low-power and
   lossy networks) need to be elaborated. For the case of a device
   reporting on behalf of other devices and controlling those devices,
   the framework will address the issues of discovery and identification
   of remote devices.

That is, the WG focus is on extending Network Management to work
effectively for network devices - and that's what the current draft,
after three years of work, adresses.

Cheers, Nevil (EMAN co-chair)

On 3/10/13 1:18 PM, Ted Ghose wrote:
> [email-masked]

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
  Nevil Brownlee                          Computer Science Department
  Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941             The University of Auckland
  FAX: +64 9 373 7453   Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand