Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <irs-discuss.ietf.org>

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 15:52:24 -0400

Gert:
 
You've hit on many good points. 
 
a.  +1 - You are right. NM has become a non-specific term. In history, ISO
defined NM as specific features (configuration, fault, performance, and
others). 
b.  +1 - roll-forward/roll-back is what is necessary.  IRS protocol, DB and
policy must allow.
c.  Sorry - I see from your 2nd message that I misunderstood your point. 

Sue
 
--------
Susan,
 
Q1: Which NM are you implying here? 
A: traditionally a functional view on the subject has been used. Think about
it. Does the fact that a piece of Software monitors a device justify to name
it 'Network Management
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/irs-discuss/current/msg00151.html> '?
Is CLI a Network Management?
 
Q2: Configuration included download plus transactional (roll
forward/roll-back). 
A: that's what's required to keep two persistent databases aligned.
 
A3: Your description does not match the current status of the IGPs or BGP
implementations. 
Q3: what let you to that conclusion?
Those are CP protocols.
 
Q4: Where do you place the Graceful-Restart
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/irs-discuss/current/msg00151.html>  or
Hitless Restart or High availability
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/irs-discuss/current/msg00151.html>
work? Do you place this in a PCE or a stateful PCE? 

A4: IETF work is always placed between 2 or more entities because we deal
with protocols.