Subject: Document Action: 'Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions' to Informational RFC

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:21:55 -0700 (PDT)

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols 
   and Protocol Extensions '
   <draft-ietf-opsawg-operations-and-management-09.txt> as an Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Operations and Management Area Working Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Dan Romascanu and Ron Bonica.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-opsawg-operations-and-management-09.txt

Technical Summary

   New protocols or protocol extensions are best designed with due
   consideration of functionality needed to operate and manage the
   protocols.  Retrofitting operations and management is sub-optimal.
   The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to authors and
   reviewers of documents defining new protocols or protocol extensions,
   about covering aspects of operations and management that should be
   considered.

Working Group Summary

   There was consensus in the working group to publish this document.

Document Quality

   The document was reviewed by a number of experts with operational and 
   management experience. An IETF Last Call was run and comments 
   received during the Last Call were incorporated in the final 
   version.  

Personnel

   Scott Bradner is the Document Shepherd for this document. Dan 
   Romascanu is the Responsible Area Director.

RFC Editor Note

1. In Section 1.2: 

OLD: 

   This document discusses the importance of considering operations and
   management by setting forth a list of guidelines and a checklist of
   questions to consider,  

NEW: 

   This document discusses the importance of considering operations and
   management by setting forth a list of guidelines and a checklist of
   questions to consider (see Appendix A), 

2. In Section 7

s/Adrian Farrell/Adrian Farrel/

3. In Section 1.6: 

OLD:
   This document is a set of guidelines
   based on current practices of protocol designers and operators.
   This document does not describe requirements, so the key words from
   RFC2119 have no place here.
NEW:
   This informational document is a set of guidelines
   based on current practices of **some** protocol designers and
operators. This
   document is biased toward router operations and management and some
advice 
   may not be directly applicable to protocols with a different purpose,
such as 
   application server protocols. This document **does not** describe 
   interoperability requirements, so the capitalized key words from
   RFC2119 do not apply here.

4. Add in Section 4:

This document does not describe interoperability requirements, but rather
describes practices that are useful to be followed in dealing with
manageability aspects in the IETF documents, so the capitalized keywords
from RFC2119 do not apply here. Any occurrence of words like 'must' or
'should' needs to be interpreted only in the context of their natural
English language meaning. 

5. In section 1.5: 

OLD: 

      SNMP [RFC3410],

      SYSLOG [RFC5424],

      RADIUS [RFC2865],

      DIAMETER [RFC3588],

      NETCONF [RFC4741],

      IPFIX [RFC5101].

NEW: 

      Simple Network Management Protocol - SNMP [RFC3410],

      SYSLOG [RFC5424],

      Remote Authentication Dial In User Service - RADIUS [RFC2865],

      DIAMETER [RFC3588],

      Network Configuration Protocol - NETCONF [RFC4741],

      IP Flow Information Export - IPFIX [RFC5101].

6. in Section 1.4

OLD: 

   One issue discussed was the user-unfriendliness of the binary format
   of SNMP [RFC3410] and COPS Usage for Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR)
   [RFC3084], and it was recommended that the IETF explore an XML-based
   Structure of Management Information, and an XML-based protocol for
   configuration.

NEW:

   One issue discussed was the user-unfriendliness of the binary format
   of SNMP [RFC3410] and Common Open Policy Service (COPS) Usage for  
   Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR)[RFC3084], and it was recommended that 
   the IETF explore an XML-based Structure of Management Information,   
   and an XML-based protocol for configuration.

7. in Section 3.1: 

OLD: 

Other Standard Development Organizations (e.g.  DMTF, TMF)

NEW: 

Other Standard Development Organizations (e.g. the Distributed Management
Task Force - DMTF, the Tele-Management Forum - TMF)

8. In Section 3.3.2: 

OLD: 

Would some threshold-based mechanisms, such as RMON events/alarms or
   the EVENT-MIB, be useable to help determine error conditions?

NEW: 

Would some threshold-based mechanisms, such as Remote Monitoring (RMON) 
events/alarms or the EVENT-MIB, be useable to help determine error
conditions?

9. In Section 3.4: 

OLD: 

There are two parts to this: 1.  An NMS system could optimize access
   control lists (ACLs) for performance reasons 

NEW: 

There are two parts to this: 1.  A Network Management System (NMS) could
optimize access control lists (ACLs) for performance reasons