Many thanks Joe for your comments, When referring to license or entitlement, we refer to the availability of being able to use a feature or asset, the scope of it is not to refer to source code, but just the “right to use” that specific feature or asset. It will be great to have an agreement from the group for the best word to use.
You are totally right about the examples; we promise we will add them. You are also right, the level that OTel offers to relate to user experience and more from an application point of view, can enforce more complex and even advanced use cases than what an IETF YANG model can offer. The user experience that we can address with DMLMO is more general to the number of users, tight to what a license/entitlement can offer, etc. We will also address this point in the draft. We also need to put more work into the “string” types. For the incident management module, we agree we didn’t add much attention into it. We are happy to align attention in the other modules as part of DMLMO excluding incident management. Marisol Palmero From: Joe Clarke (jclarke) <jclarke=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> Date: Friday, 10 March 2023 at 21:50 To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) <mpalm...@cisco.com>, opsawg@ietf.org <opsawg@ietf.org>, Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwil...@cisco.com> Cc: Sudhendu Kumar <sudhendu.kumar....@gmail.com>, Shwetha Bhandari <shwetha.bhand...@thoughtspot.com>, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) <jlind...@cisco.com>, inventory-y...@ietf.org <inventory-y...@ietf.org> Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt Hello, authors. I’ve read through the new -09 and I have a few comments and questions. First, thanks for the effort here to abstract inventory and to show how this work can map to other inventory models. I’m not sure your change from license to entitlement tracks 100%. Your model for “entitlement” strongly resembles a vendor entitlement and not something that would be issued by the Open Source community as you say in section 2. I would be very curious how you see modeling, say, the BSD License in this entitlement framework. On that point, I think this draft would benefit from some examples of different hardware, software, and entitlements and how they would look in this overall model. In Section 2, your last term is “User Experience” which you describe as being influenced by “ease of use” as it pertains to a user’s experience. Where and how is that rationalized in your four classes described in Section 3? And wouldn’t those four classes describe LMO vs. the user experience? Specifically, the description of an asset (class 1) doesn’t seem to me to be directly related to user experience. I also wonder how some of the feature use elements might also fit into Open Telemetry and instrumentation of an application to understand use. I’m not saying OTel replaces this, but there might be some cross-over there in the application space. That might even get closer to understanding the ease of use you mention. With respect to the YANG modules, there are a lot of “string” types here. In particular, the incident management model feels both under-described and perhaps too restrictive in its fields to provide general use across multiple vendors and OSS. Ultimately, I feel this draft, even with it being more agnostic to inventory, is trying to cover a lot of ground. Perhaps an initial focus on entitlements and/or features would be helpful in focusing the work. Joe From: OPSAWG <opsawg-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) <mpalmero=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> Date: Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:58 To: opsawg@ietf.org <opsawg@ietf.org>, Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwil...@cisco.com> Cc: Sudhendu Kumar <sudhendu.kumar....@gmail.com>, Shwetha Bhandari <shwetha.bhand...@thoughtspot.com>, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) <jlind...@cisco.com>, inventory-y...@ietf.org <inventory-y...@ietf.org> Subject: [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt Dear OPSA WG/AD, We've just posted a new version, v09, for DMLMO, data model for lifecycle management and operations: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt Where we have been addressing the comments given during OPSA WG meeting and inventory side meeting, part of IETF #115. DMLMO version 09 is independent from inventory, where the DMLMO YANG modules, as specific ietf-lmo-assets YANG module, can consume from any other specific inventory YANG module(s). An example is given in Appendix A. version 09 * Rename "license" to "entitlement". * renamed ietf-lmo-assets-inventory to ietf-lmo-assets. * ietf-lmo-assets provides capability of integration and extention for a different approach on how to address inventory use cases. Process is explained in the Appendix A. * ietf-lmo-example-mapping-XXX YANG modules accommodates the ietf-lmo-assets YANG module to any other inventory which will be required in the future to be referenced. We greatly appreciate your thoughts, comments and evaluation. Many thanks, Marisol Palmero From: internet-dra...@ietf.org <internet-dra...@ietf.org> Date: Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 18:28 To: Camilo Cardona <cam...@ntt.net>, Diego Lopez <diego.r.lo...@telefonica.com>, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <fbroc...@cisco.com>, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) <mpalm...@cisco.com>, Shwetha Bhandari <shwetha.bhand...@thoughtspot.com>, Sudhendu Kumar <skuma...@ncsu.edu> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt A new version of I-D, draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt has been successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo Revision: 09 Title: Data Model for Lifecycle Management and Operations Document date: 2023-01-17 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 80 URL: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/ Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo Diff: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09 Abstract: This document motivates and specifies a data model for lifecycle management and operations. It describes the motivation and requirements to collect asset-centric metrics including but not limited to asset adoption and usability, licensing, supported features and capabilities, enabled features and capabilities, etc.; with the primary objective to measure and improve the overall user experience along the lifecycle journey, from technical requirements and technology selection through advocacy and renewal, including the end of life of an asset. The IETF Secretariat
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
