Re: draft-amante-isis-reverse-metric-01

Shane,

> 
> Robert, Bruno, (Jay),
> 
> It is an explicit /non-goal/, even outside the context of this draft,
to
> port an NMS system and/or configuration generation system *into*
IS-IS.
> Call me old-school, but a routing protocol, (particularly an IGP),
should
> only distribute topology/reachability information, as fast as [is,
safely]
> possible.  Asking that routing protocol to also push around counters
(snmp
> over IS-IS <barf>), general-purpose configuration information (netconf
> over IS-IS <barf>), etc. is contrary to that goal for all the reasons
that
> you're already familiar with.  

May be I was not clear in my previous email but your above text does not
reflect what I meant.

1) From a protocol standpoint, by

> From: bruno.decraene <at> orange-ftgroup.com
> 
> So what about doing (a) with management protocols? i.e. a router A
> providing a single CLI and triggering the remote action on router B
> using management protocols.

I meant _regular_ management protocols. E.g SNMP over UDP/IP or netconf
over TCP/IP. Nothing related to IS-IS, especially _not_ "snmp over IS-IS
<barf>"

2) From a general standpoint, I did not mean to port NMS into IS-IS,
quite the contrary in fact.

Bruno

> To be more clear, the scope of this draft is to make operation of an
IS-IS
> network dramatically less error-prone by simplifying the handling of
_a_
> (notice the explicit use of the singular) very well-known,
widely-used,
> routine maintenance procedure that occurs on networks day-in and
day-out,
> the world over, _specifically_: p2p link /and/ multi-access LAN
isolation.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -shane
> 
> 
> On Dec 7, 2010, at 15:46 MST, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> > Hi Jay,
> >
> > Just one clarification ...
> >
> > What I and also Bruno pointed out was a bit more restrictive that
your
> interpretation :)
> >
> > While each node would be an equal class citizen in such ability to
> configure the network or to set a parameter of a p2p or p2mp link it
does
> not mean that one would essentially need to enable such ability on
each
> node.
> >
> > Clearly also it would not be available to anyone. Only to the same
> access level as today allowing for configuration.
> >
> > As to the topic of what protocol would fit such role I do agree with
> your comment that we would probably need some form of hybrid. The
reliable
> domain wide flooding should be combined with incremental updates
ability.
> >
> > Volume wise I am not sure we are to have "huge volumes". Clearly
what
> differs this type of fundamentally different approach to NMS that it
is
> not targetted to be a carrier for SNMP pooling stats or netflow
records.
> >
> > Many thx,
> > R.
> >
> >> wide config making each router to be an NMS station. Call it
C-ISIS.
> >> Example: instead of configuring links on the adjacent nodes
configure
> >> link parameter anywhere, instead of configuring node at a node ..
> >> configure it anywhere.
> >>
> >> Very interesting. Configure anywhere by anyone (maybe any computer)
> >> will be every powerful and very scaring too (security). A graph of
> >> network and transport of configure information will be needed. If
> >> protocol is proposed to do the job, should be a single protocol
best
> >> fit? ISIS does know the topology of the network, on another hand
BGP
> >> is better to transmit huge data and does incremental updates
> >> reliablely. A combination of functions from multiple protocol seems
> >> better than extending a single protocol.
> >>
> >> Jay
> >>
> >>
> >> Many thx, R.
> >>
> >> PS.
> >>
> >> /* After all we have many uses for ISIS today ... TRILL included :)
> >> */
> >>
> >>
> >>> Robert,
> >>>
> >>>> Instead of working on network wide level config tool/protocol we
> >>>> are extending protocols to achieve the equivalent functionality.
> >>>> And this is not only in ISIS, we do the same in BGP, we do the
> >>>> same in MPLS etc ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So, you're suggesting that we stop work on improving protocols
> >>> until the NMS folks get their act together.
> >>>
> >>> This doesn't seem like a practical suggestion.
> >>>
> >>> Regards, Tony
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________ Isis-wg mailing
list
> >> Isis-wg <at> ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Isis-wg mailing list
> > Isis-wg <at> ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Isis-wg mailing list
> Isis-wg <at> ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg