Subject: RE: [ippm] RE: Management requirements.

From: STEPHAN Emile FTRD/DAC/LAN <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:52:32 +0100

Hi Victor,

you got the point this release of the draft-stephan-ippm-mgmt-reqs.txt has
to be upgraded. 

At the time I started to write it(September 2001) the official name of the
control protocol was still OWDP. Passive measures are out of the scope of
the IPPM WG (please verify).

I plan to upgrade it in April. I have a couple of points to add in it
regarding the needs for the management of inter domain spatial metrics
result (see draft-stephan-ippm-multicast-metrics-00.txt). 

Could you be more specific about "Is that also not something for the
individual measurements to take into account? " 

regards
emile

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Victor Reijs [mailto:[email-masked]]
Envoyé : lundi 25 février 2002 16:27
À : IPPM Working Group
Objet : [ippm] RE: Management requirements.

Hello Emile, 

Thanks for your draft document (nov. 2001). Just a few points: 
. I think OWDP is the old name; I assume it should mow be OWAMP.
. Please also have a look at the basic specification I foresee for a 
measurement infrastructure: 
http://www.dante.net/tf-ngn/D9.4v2.pdf (section 3.3) 
Most of them are covered by your proposal, but I think a few still need 
some more though, like:
  + explicitly mention that it is supporting passive and active 
measurements. Or do you think it only should support one of the two?
  + resource control; I think this is something the Management plane has
to 
control. Not only for 'accuracy' reasons but also for load reasons (and 
perhaps also 'oscillation' reason, see next point).
. is 'the sampling law' something that only the management requirements
needs to 
define? Is that also not something for the individual measurements to
take into account? 
So this is a shared issue.
. is a reference to NIMI also not helpful? 

Hope you can use the above comments. 

All the best, 

Victor
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mailhost.advanced.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm

---

From: Victor Reijs <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:02:33 +0000

Hello Emile,

> STEPHAN Emile FTRD/DAC/LAN wrote:
> 
> Hi Victor,
> 
> you got the point this release of the draft-stephan-ippm-mgmt-reqs.txt
> has to be upgraded.
> 
> At the time I started to write it(September 2001) the official name of
> the control protocol was still OWDP. Passive measures are out of the
> scope of the IPPM WG (please verify).

Is it in principle possible to provide both with your frame work set up,
or is it only not possible because it is outside the scope of IPPM?
If it is a princple (technology) issue in your frame-work, can you point
me out what that principle issue is?

All the best,

Victor