Subject: [lmap] Workshop following LMAP Interim Meeting

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 16:05:51 +0100

As well as the LMAP interim on Monday afternoon, there are a couple of related sessions on the Tuesday (all in the same location in Dublin, at the Broadband Forum meeting) - LMAP people are invited to these, regardless of whether you're a BBF member.

Tuesday morning there's a session to resolve comments on the 'straw ballot' version of WT-304, see liaison http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lmap/current/msg01736.html [Roughly speaking, WT-304 is the Broadband Forum's equivalent of the lmap architecture document, and this is their WG last call.]

Tuesday afternoon there's a workshop on "Large-scale measurements - from standards to implementation and adoption". Here's the draft agenda:-

Topic 1: Implementation and adoption of metrics in BBF devices

The IPPM WG at the IETF has defined many IP-related metrics and is currently defining additional metrics, measurement protocol extensions and a process for registering metrics. How should this work be implemented in a BBF device?

1. Introduction

-        The overall Registry concept and an overview of the IPPM RFCs and documents

2. Walk through "the life of a metric" (perhaps packet delay variation):

-        Definition, e.g. in an RFC.

-        Additional info required for registry (roles, parameters, etc.) that's not in RFC.

-        The registration process, including review and approval within IETF.

-        How Measurement Tasks are derived from a registry entry.

-        How Measurement Results are specified.

-        If time allows, it would also be useful to discuss a sub-IP metric.

3. BBF's role in metrics

-        Should the BBF define a list of metrics that BBF devices must /should /typically implement? (WT-304 Section 7 lists some performance metrics but not associated requirements)

-        What metrics will the BBF define itself, at IP and other layers, if any? How will metrics defined by non-IETF organizations (and especially those at non-IP layers) be registered?

4. BBF's role in related issues

-        Should the BBF define specific statistics derived from measurement results?

-        Should the BBF define Characterization Plans (how many probes testing on what schedule)?

Topic 2: Implementation and adoption of the information model in BBF devices

The LMAP WG at the IETF is defining an (abstract) information model for broadband measurements. How should this work be implemented in BBF devices?

1. Introduction - the overall information and data model concept and an overview of the TR-181 based work

2. Implementation of the Information Model by BBF

1. Control protocol and data model based on TR-181

2. Report protocol and data model based on TR-232 (IPDR)

3. BBF extensions to information model

1. Rules for avoiding cross-traffic?

2. Rules of retrying tests?

4. Early planning for an interop /plugfest

---
Note:
Non- Broadband Forum members can come to all 3 sessions for free - providing you register as soon as possible  http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lmap/current/msg01750.html
There will be remote listen-in for the lmap meeting - not sure about the Tuesday sessions (please let me know if you'd like it, and I'll try)
On Tuesday, the exact timings are to be confirmed.
Different BBF WGs meet in parallel - the agenda is decided late.

Best wishes,
phil

From: lmap [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Weil, Jason
Sent: 02 September 2014 16:49
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lmap] Draft LMAP Interim Meeting Agenda (Time Correction)

It was pointed out by a few of you that I have an incorrect start time for this meeting.

LMAP WG Interim Meeting

Date and Time: Monday, September 15, 2014, 1430(2:30pm) -1830 (6:30pm) IST

1. Note Well, Note Takers, Jabber Scribes, Agenda Bashing - Chairs (5 min)

2. WG Status - Chairs (5 min)

3. Use Cases Discussion - Respond to AD Comments (tentative) - 15 min

4. LMAP Information Model - Address LC Comments - TBD - 30 min

5. Protocol Discussion - 105 min

                  YANG Model - Arne O. - 15min

                  HTTP Style Protocol  - ? - 15min

                  REST Style Protocols -  ? - 15 min

                  Protocol Discussion - ?   - 60 min
6. Discuss IPPM Registry - 30 min

7. Next steps and open mic -
There is still time available,  so I have inserted an item to discuss the IPPM registry as well.

Jason

________________________________
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.