Subject: [Call-home] bof at vancouver?

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 11:59:34 +0200

All,

Could you signify your interest in a BoF at VC?  I've placed a request 
with Bert, and he would like to understand whether there is interest.

Here is a draft agenda.  We're looking for another chair as I believe I 
would end up presenting.

Comments?

Request for a BoF:

Title: callhome
Period of time: 1 hour
Area: ops-nm
Expected # attendees: 40-60 (small room)
Don't conflict with: ISMS, ops-area, netconf (if there is one)

Short Description: Discussion of Architectural Issues Concerning
            protocols that could benefit from reversing
            of roles

Long Description:

Certain protocols, and in particular management protocols where
devices on either end of connection take client server roles may
be able to take advantage of "Call Home" functionality, when
traditional roles are reversed, and a server connect to a client.
Examples of existing protocols that make use of call home include
SMTP [ETRN] and COPS.  At this BoF we will look at extending such
functionality into other protocols, as well as any architectural
issues this raises.

This work stems from efforts in ISMS to extend SNMP to run over SSH,
as well as work as work that has gone on in NETCONF.

We will begin with a discussion of 
draft-lear-callhome-description-00.txt, which contains a description of 
call home, what problems it can solve, and what some of the 
architectural issues are.  During the BoF we may identify additional 
such issues as well as protocols other than management protocols that 
could benefit from this work.  An additional potential question should 
be whether a generic standard or process should be used to implement 
call home, such as rules for SSH.

There are three possible outcomes: a working group to add "call home"
functionality to existing protocols such as SNMP/SSH and NETCONF/SSH,
use of existing working groups for this purpose, or nothing.

Chair: Eliot Lear (or tbd)
Agenda:

Agenda bashing - 1 minute
Presentation of draft-lear-callhome-description-00.txt 19 minutes
Application to SNMP and open areas - 10 minutes
Discussion including architectural issues - 20 minutes
Moving Forward Options  - 10 minutes

Regards,

Eliot

_______________________________________________
Call-home mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/call-home

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 13:35:09 +0200

> with Bert, and he would like to understand whether there is interest.

Bert also offered the option to use some time in the ops area meeting.
Is this option off the table now?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 13:40:50 +0200

Juergen,
> Is this option off the table now?

I think so, but for the record I am fine with either option.  Perhaps 
others would like to express an opinion.  One issue that was raised was 
whether the other groups would have sufficient visibility to call-home 
if it's in the ops-area group.  BoFs, on the other hand, seem to have a 
lot more formality tied to them.  Again, I'm fine with either option.

Eliot