Re: [OPSAWG] side meeting #119: Power Metrics: concrete usage example

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Many thanks Rob for the extended notes.
I think it is a really good summary from the outcome of the meeting.

Just to add to on initial discussion of the meeting, due to technical issues 
with opening the Webex, we were left with 45 minutes, from the initial 1 hour 
scheduled.
The people presented in the side meeting provided a short highlevel update on 
the current status from the following drafts, including:


  *   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cx-opsawg-green-metrics/
  *   draft-li-ivy-power
  *   draft-petra-path-energy-api
  *   draft-almprs-sustainability-insights
  *   draft-opsawg-poweff
  *   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cwbgp-ivy-energy-saving-management/


rgds,
Marisol


From: Rob Wilton (rwilton) 
Date: Monday, 25 March 2024 at 15:48
To: Carlos Pignataro , Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) 

Cc: opsawg@ietf.org , e-imp...@ietf.org , 
inventory-y...@ietf.org , Alexander Clemm 
, Alberto Rodriguez-Natal (natal) , Ron Bonica 
, Mahesh Jethanandani , Ali 
Rezaki (Nokia) , Suresh Krishnan (sureshk) 
, Jari Arkko 
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] side meeting #119: Power Metrics: concrete usage example
Hi Carlos,

During IETF 119, I had a couple of discussions with Suresh and Mahesh regarding 
how we actual get some of the short term “green” related work happening in IETF 
to get critical mass and cross review and get published in the short term.  
This seemed to somewhat culminate during the Power Metrics side meeting where 
it is clear that:

· Various folks, representing different organizations, have various 
drafts related to Green networking.

· Currently these drafts are spread out to different working groups, 
have various amounts of overlap, and it is unclear that they currently have a 
good homes and sufficient traction in IETF to progress effectively.

· There was support in the meeting to target a WG forming BOF for IETF 
120 to create a new WG with a limited targeted charter.

Hence the proposal from Suresh and I was to try and help coordinate for a WG 
forming BOF for IETF 120 scoped specifically to work on items that are 
understood and achievable in the short term.  E.g., roughly, I currently think 
of this work scope as being: e.g., energy related terminology and definitions 
(that should try and leverage and reference existing definitions from existing 
published sources), reporting energy and sustainability at the device and 
network layer via operational YANG models, and to facilitate configuration or 
YANG RPCs to influence and optimise power usage on network devices.  Longer 
term energy efficiency and Green networking goals are intended to be out of 
scope for the proposed WG’s initial charter, and should continue to be 
discussed as part of the E-Impact IAB program.  The exact scope of the charter 
would be worked out between the interested parties in the coming weeks.
I’m happy to try and help this work gain traction within the IETF.  I 
appreciate that several of the proponents for this work are also from Cisco, 
but I have no vested interest other than trying to help the industry take small 
steps that may help improve energy efficiency in networks (e.g., reporting 
power usage, and as Tony suggests by selectively powering off ports or 
linecards) to try and help mitigate some of the impacts of the Internet on 
climate change.

To that end the proposed next steps from that side meeting were:

1.  For me to request the creation of new open “green-bof” mailing list 
from Mahesh (hopefully should be done over the next few days).

2.  I asked for, and received, permission to subscribe those who attended 
the side meeting, but once created, I also intended to circulate the existence 
of the mailing list to e-impact, and other places where related discussions 
have been taking place, so that others can join.

3.  To create a github location where we can reference drafts and 
collecting work on a BOF proposal and draft charter for the WG (which as I 
stated above, should be narrowly scoped to only the work that is well 
understood and achievable in the short term).  If I can get this under the IETF 
github space, great, otherwise I can host a personal github.  I’m already 
checking with Mahesh on the feasibility of the github location being IETF 
hosted.

4.  Once the mailing list is up and running, the next step is to arrange a 
few virtual meetings to try and gain consensus on the proposed initial scope of 
the WG, and to start reviewing and pulling together the BOF proposal, and 
charter text.

5.  To submit a BOF request for IETF 120.  The key dates being:

a.  Warn the IESG and Secretariat that we are hoping for a BOF by 22nd 
April (note Mahesh is already aware and this has already been informally 
flagged to the IESG)

b. Get the initial BOF submission in before 5th May

c.  Refine the BOF proposal based on feedback received, and update by 7th 
June

d. 14th June, we hear back whether the BOF has been

[OPSAWG] side meeting #119: Power Metrics: concrete usage example

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear all,

We have booked a side meeting in Brisbone,  IETF #119
Thursday 9:00 am local time.
Headline: Power Metrics: concrete usage example


Please see the agenda that we are proposing:

•  Overview of ongoing sustainability work in IETF (everyone 
contributes)
•  Brief presentation of sustainability insights/poweff updates, 
incl. look at a more concrete example
•  Any other short updates?
•  next steps? E.g. WG coordination/status, form a WG Design Team, 
call for a BOF?


As we would like to leave time to discuss and review **next steps**, for the 
overview we propose not more than 20 min.
As authors from specific drafts, please let me know which draft(s) you would 
like to review, we would like to make sure that we could fit them into the 20 
min

Safe travels, and have a nice weekend

Marisol Palmero, on behalf of the authors of sustainability insights& poweff 
drafts

___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Many thanks Joe/Tianran for your suggestions.
We will add in the next release of the draft, if not the complete tree, 
meaningful sections that we consider to be more important for each module.
Marisol



From: Joe Clarke (jclarke) 
Date: Tuesday, 31 October 2023 at 14:08
To: Tianran Zhou , Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) 
, opsawg 
Cc: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) , 
emile.stephan , Per Andersson (perander) 
, Esther Roure Vila (erourevi) 
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for 
draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Yes!  I knew I was forgetting to mention something.  That would help.  I found 
myself doing a lot of back and forth scrolling to grok things.

Joe

From: OPSAWG  on behalf of Tianran Zhou 

Date: Tuesday, October 31, 2023 at 09:01
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
opsawg 
Cc: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) , 
emile.stephan , Per Andersson (perander) 
, Esther Roure Vila (erourevi) , 
emile.stephan 
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for 
draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Hi Marisol,

Could you please add the YANG tree in the draft? So that people can understand 
your idea easier.

Best,
Tianran






Sent from WeLink
发件人： Marisol Palmero Amador 
(mpalmero)mailto:mpalmero=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>>
收件人： opsawgmailto:opsawg@ietf.org>>
抄送： Gonzalo Salgueiro 
(gsalguei)mailto:gsalg...@cisco.com>>;Jan Lindblad 
(jlindbla)mailto:jlind...@cisco.com>>;Snezana Mitrovic 
(snmitrov)mailto:snmit...@cisco.com>>;emile.stephanmailto:emile.step...@orange.com>>;Per
 Andersson (perander)mailto:peran...@cisco.com>>;Esther 
Roure Vila 
(erourevi)mailto:erour...@cisco.com>>;emile.stephanmailto:emile.step...@orange.com>>
主题： [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
时间： 2023-10-28 01:09:07

Dear OPSA WG,

Earlier this week, we posted a new draft that introduces a data model for power 
and energy related metrics :
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/
The focus is mainly on runtime information provided by power sensors, but also 
an extension to other related metrics and given attributes that will complement 
the representation of the energy consumed by the network device, implemented in 
hardware or software, as well as by specific network components.
This is a first-version approach where we see still challenges based on 
implementation.
Note: Some of those challenges are covered on Jan`s draft: 
draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist/>

Along with POWEFF draft, we’ve also updated the version of the Sustainability 
Insights draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-almprs-sustainability-insights/
where we introduced an updated architecture reference diagram, that provides a 
more structured view of the functional blocks that might be part of where those 
attributes and metrics might be produced, processed, visualized, etc. We also 
have reviewed and added Use Cases that such framework could drive.

We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero


From: internet-dra...@ietf.org 
Date: Friday, 20 October 2023 at 17:45
To: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) 
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
A new version of Internet-Draft draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt has been
successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: draft-opsawg-poweff
Revision: 00
Title:Power and Energy Efficiency
Date: 2023-10-20
Group:Individual Submission
Pages:37
URL:  https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Status:   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/
HTMLized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-opsawg-poweff


Abstract:

   This document motivates and specifies a data model to report power
   and energy efficiency of an asset.  As highlighted during the IAB
   workshop on environmental impacts
   (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iab-ws-environmental-
   impacts-report-00), visibility is a very important first step
   (paraphrasing Peter Drucker's mantra of "You cannot improve what you
   don't measure").  During the workshop the need for standardized
   metrics was established, to avoid proprietary, double counting and
   even contradictory metrics across vendors.

   This Power and Energy Efficiency Telemetry Specification (POWEFF) is
   required to promote consistency across vendors and consumers, based
   on: 1.  The definition of datasets and attributes defining a common
   data model utilized by the standard calculation to yield power and
   energy efficiency value for any asset or network element.  2.  The
   standard calcula

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Hi Med,
Many thanks for your valuable input.

We will address your comments in our next review of the document. I look 
forward to discussing this further in Prague. I didn’t have time to review all 
your comments in detail yet, but we will get back to you on it.

As mentioned to Benoit Claise, in previous email, we will add a reference to 
rfc7460 and EMAN-related work in the next release.

Indeed, the reference to the inventory refers to the ongoing work of the IVY 
WG. Also hope that before the next release of the document, it will also be a 
clearer definition/structure of how the inventory modules will look like.

Many thanks,
Marisol


Marisol Palmero
CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEA  | Cisco CPX TEAO | P: +34.91.201.2643 | M: 
+34.629.634.595


From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com 
Date: Tuesday, 31 October 2023 at 15:21
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , opsawg@ietf.org 

Cc: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) , STEPHAN 
Emile INNOV/NET , Per Andersson (perander) 
, Esther Roure Vila (erourevi) 
Subject: RE: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Hi Marisol, all,

Thank you for sharing this document.

FWIW, you may find some comments at:

  *   Pdf: 
https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/blob/master/draft-opsawg-poweff-00-rev%20Med.pdf
  *   Doc: 
https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-opsawg-poweff-00-rev%20Med.doc

I was expecting to see at least some references or reuse of some of the aspects 
already covered in documents such as rfc7460. I was also surprised by some 
deviations form the interface module without explaining the rationale.

Overall, the rationale for the modules structure and how they can be used to 
achieve the goals set in the first sections of the document are missing. Also, 
the document cites the inventory model but I was not sure whether you are 
referring to the IVY ongoing work.

This is a -00, so please don’t be surprised by the 69 comments in the review.

Cheers,
Med

De : OPSAWG  De la part de Marisol Palmero Amador 
(mpalmero)
Envoyé : vendredi 27 octobre 2023 19:07
À : opsawg@ietf.org
Cc : Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) ; Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
; Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) ; STEPHAN 
Emile INNOV/NET ; Per Andersson (perander) 
; Esther Roure Vila (erourevi) ; 
STEPHAN Emile INNOV/NET 
Objet : [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt

Dear OPSA WG,

Earlier this week, we posted a new draft that introduces a data model for power 
and energy related metrics :
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/
The focus is mainly on runtime information provided by power sensors, but also 
an extension to other related metrics and given attributes that will complement 
the representation of the energy consumed by the network device, implemented in 
hardware or software, as well as by specific network components.
This is a first-version approach where we see still challenges based on 
implementation.
Note: Some of those challenges are covered on Jan`s draft: 
draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist/>

Along with POWEFF draft, we’ve also updated the version of the Sustainability 
Insights draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-almprs-sustainability-insights/
where we introduced an updated architecture reference diagram, that provides a 
more structured view of the functional blocks that might be part of where those 
attributes and metrics might be produced, processed, visualized, etc. We also 
have reviewed and added Use Cases that such framework could drive.

We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero


From: internet-dra...@ietf.org<mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org> 
mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org>>
Date: Friday, 20 October 2023 at 17:45
To: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) 
mailto:gsalg...@cisco.com>>, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
mailto:jlind...@cisco.com>>, Marisol Palmero Amador 
(mpalmero) mailto:mpalm...@cisco.com>>, Snezana Mitrovic 
(snmitrov) mailto:snmit...@cisco.com>>
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
A new version of Internet-Draft draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt has been
successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: draft-opsawg-poweff
Revision: 00
Title:Power and Energy Efficiency
Date: 2023-10-20
Group:Individual Submission
Pages:37
URL:  https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Status:   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/
HTMLized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-opsawg-poweff


Abstract:

   This document motivates and specifies a data model to report power
   and energy efficiency of an asset.  As highlighted during the IAB
   workshop on environmental impacts
   (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iab-ws-environmental-
   impacts-report

Re: [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Hi Benoit,
Thanks for your note.
I agree, we should include a note & reference to the EMAN RFC’s related work, 
as you pointed out, where there are similar concepts to some of the attributes 
that we define in POWEFF.

It is also my view, that Sustainability Insights draft enlarges the approach to 
cover sustainability concept vs Energy Management.

As part of the next steps, we are looking into extending POWEFF(YANG based), to 
be able to consume any sensor-related information, and this should include EMAN 
attributes, where we might end up with 1:1 relationship mapping.

Many thanks,
Marisol



From: Benoit Claise 
Date: Tuesday, 31 October 2023 at 15:28
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , opsawg@ietf.org 

Cc: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) , 
emile.step...@orange.com , Per Andersson (perander) 
, Esther Roure Vila (erourevi) 
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for 
draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Hi Marisol,

Is there any link with this series of documents at 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/eman/documents/ ?
Granted, these are a little old. MIB and not YANG modules, but some concepts 
are similar.

Regards, Benoit
On 10/27/2023 7:07 PM, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) wrote:
Dear OPSA WG,

Earlier this week, we posted a new draft that introduces a data model for power 
and energy related metrics :
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/


The focus is mainly on runtime information provided by power sensors, but also 
an extension to other related metrics and given attributes that will complement 
the representation of the energy consumed by the network device, implemented in 
hardware or software, as well as by specific network components.
This is a first-version approach where we see still challenges based on 
implementation.
Note: Some of those challenges are covered on Jan`s draft: 
draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist/>

Along with POWEFF draft, we’ve also updated the version of the Sustainability 
Insights draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-almprs-sustainability-insights/
where we introduced an updated architecture reference diagram, that provides a 
more structured view of the functional blocks that might be part of where those 
attributes and metrics might be produced, processed, visualized, etc. We also 
have reviewed and added Use Cases that such framework could drive.

We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero


From: internet-dra...@ietf.org<mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org> 
<mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org>
Date: Friday, 20 October 2023 at 17:45
To: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) 
<mailto:gsalg...@cisco.com>, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
<mailto:jlind...@cisco.com>, Marisol Palmero Amador 
(mpalmero) <mailto:mpalm...@cisco.com>, Snezana Mitrovic 
(snmitrov) <mailto:snmit...@cisco.com>
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
A new version of Internet-Draft draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt has been
successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: draft-opsawg-poweff
Revision: 00
Title:Power and Energy Efficiency
Date: 2023-10-20
Group:Individual Submission
Pages:37
URL:  https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Status:   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/
HTMLized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-opsawg-poweff


Abstract:

   This document motivates and specifies a data model to report power
   and energy efficiency of an asset.  As highlighted during the IAB
   workshop on environmental impacts
   (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iab-ws-environmental-
   impacts-report-00), visibility is a very important first step
   (paraphrasing Peter Drucker's mantra of "You cannot improve what you
   don't measure").  During the workshop the need for standardized
   metrics was established, to avoid proprietary, double counting and
   even contradictory metrics across vendors.

   This Power and Energy Efficiency Telemetry Specification (POWEFF) is
   required to promote consistency across vendors and consumers, based
   on: 1.  The definition of datasets and attributes defining a common
   data model utilized by the standard calculation to yield power and
   energy efficiency value for any asset or network element.  2.  The
   standard calculations utilizing the specified datasets and attributes
   which will yield energy consumption and energy efficiency value for
   any asset or network element.

   The model provides information and data requirements for calculating
   the Power and Energy Efficiency for specific assets.  Assets can
   include hardware (physical or virtual), software, applications, or
   services.



The IETF Secretariat





___

OPSAWG mailing l

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Thanks Joe for your notes and valid comments.
Please find my answers inline

Marisol Palmero


From: Joe Clarke (jclarke) 
Date: Friday, 27 October 2023 at 20:53
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , opsawg@ietf.org 

Cc: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) , 
emile.step...@orange.com , Per Andersson (perander) 
, Esther Roure Vila (erourevi) 
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
I had a brief read of POWEFF, and I have some questions/possible discussion 
points for your presentation (as a contributor).

You mention calculation in the draft, but I didn’t see this reflected in the 
data model.  Note that I’m not sure the data model needs to address 
calculations per se.  I think you could spell those out outside of YANG, with 
respect to the data objects.  I just expected to see some specifics or examples 
of using the modeled data to reflect a composite energy efficiency metric.


[Marisol]
Calculations will be part of what we consider part of the POWEFF-derived module
We need more discussions, and feedback from the group on it
Our next steps are considering linking into the draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist 
proposal. This module should contribute to the data produced by the 
aggregation/processor, where we might need to consume from pointers and 
metadata, like ietf-interfaces model.

On the data model, I’m a bit confused why the network interface module is 
needed.  In your text about this you say that it might line up exactly to 
standardized modules, but it’s needed for those things that are not network 
devices.  What devices are not network devices that have network interfaces and 
don’t fit into the general, say, ietf-interfaces model?

[Marisol]
Our thought it is more in the direction on how to add into “useful work” and 
which attributes/“sensors” might be part of it. As part of the asset 
definition, we are not only looking into network devices, but we also consider 
servers, as part of compute, they also have defined interfaces, and it might be 
where YANG ietf-interface model doesn’t fit well. But we agree that pointers 
should address different types of assets.

Finally, why are all of these objects config true?  The way I read this, a 
vendor or device manufacturer would stream these objects based on how the 
system is built or how it’s operating.  I can’t see any reason why one would 
need to configure any of this.
[Marisol]
100%, we need to change this.


As chair, I’d love to see how this factors into the green networking metrics 
work that has been presented at opsawg before.  Some of the text touches on 
similar topics.  Perhaps POWEFF can be seen to take a practical approach to 
some of the concepts and thoughts in draft-cx-opsawg-green-metrics?

[Marisol]
We have scheduled a Side Meeting on Monday morning, and it will be great to 
review with the green-metrics authors, how we should move forward
Side meeting: Monday Nov 6, 8:45 - 9:30Karlin 4 Sustainability 
Insights. Description: Gaps on Power Metrics Normalization


Many thanks,
Marisol



Joe

From: OPSAWG  on behalf of Marisol Palmero Amador 
(mpalmero) 
Date: Friday, October 27, 2023 at 13:07
To: opsawg@ietf.org 
Cc: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) , 
emile.step...@orange.com , Per Andersson (perander) 
, Esther Roure Vila (erourevi) , 
emile.step...@orange.com 
Subject: [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Dear OPSA WG,

Earlier this week, we posted a new draft that introduces a data model for power 
and energy related metrics :
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/



The focus is mainly on runtime information provided by power sensors, but also 
an extension to other related metrics and given attributes that will complement 
the representation of the energy consumed by the network device, implemented in 
hardware or software, as well as by specific network components.
This is a first-version approach where we see still challenges based on 
implementation.
Note: Some of those challenges are covered on Jan`s draft: 
draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist/>

Along with POWEFF draft, we’ve also updated the version of the Sustainability 
Insights draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-almprs-sustainability-insights/
where we introduced an updated architecture reference diagram, that provides a 
more structured view of the functional blocks that might be part of where those 
attributes and metrics might be produced, processed, visualized, etc. We also 
have reviewed and added Use Cases that such framework could drive.

We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero


From: internet-dra...@ietf.org 
Date: Friday, 20 October 2023 at 17:45
To: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
S

[OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA WG,

Earlier this week, we posted a new draft that introduces a data model for power 
and energy related metrics :
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/

The focus is mainly on runtime information provided by power sensors, but also 
an extension to other related metrics and given attributes that will complement 
the representation of the energy consumed by the network device, implemented in 
hardware or software, as well as by specific network components.
This is a first-version approach where we see still challenges based on 
implementation.
Note: Some of those challenges are covered on Jan`s draft: 
draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lindblad-tlm-philatelist/>

Along with POWEFF draft, we’ve also updated the version of the Sustainability 
Insights draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-almprs-sustainability-insights/
where we introduced an updated architecture reference diagram, that provides a 
more structured view of the functional blocks that might be part of where those 
attributes and metrics might be produced, processed, visualized, etc. We also 
have reviewed and added Use Cases that such framework could drive.

We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero


From: internet-dra...@ietf.org 
Date: Friday, 20 October 2023 at 17:45
To: Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
Snezana Mitrovic (snmitrov) 
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
A new version of Internet-Draft draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt has been
successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: draft-opsawg-poweff
Revision: 00
Title:Power and Energy Efficiency
Date: 2023-10-20
Group:Individual Submission
Pages:37
URL:  https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-opsawg-poweff-00.txt
Status:   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-poweff/
HTMLized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-opsawg-poweff


Abstract:

   This document motivates and specifies a data model to report power
   and energy efficiency of an asset.  As highlighted during the IAB
   workshop on environmental impacts
   (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iab-ws-environmental-
   impacts-report-00), visibility is a very important first step
   (paraphrasing Peter Drucker's mantra of "You cannot improve what you
   don't measure").  During the workshop the need for standardized
   metrics was established, to avoid proprietary, double counting and
   even contradictory metrics across vendors.

   This Power and Energy Efficiency Telemetry Specification (POWEFF) is
   required to promote consistency across vendors and consumers, based
   on: 1.  The definition of datasets and attributes defining a common
   data model utilized by the standard calculation to yield power and
   energy efficiency value for any asset or network element.  2.  The
   standard calculations utilizing the specified datasets and attributes
   which will yield energy consumption and energy efficiency value for
   any asset or network element.

   The model provides information and data requirements for calculating
   the Power and Energy Efficiency for specific assets.  Assets can
   include hardware (physical or virtual), software, applications, or
   services.



The IETF Secretariat

___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

[OPSAWG] Session slot request in OPSAWG

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear chairs,
We would like to ask you for a session slot, when possible, on Monday session.

We would like to introduce to the working group two drafts:

  *   Sustainability Insights - 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-almprs-sustainability-insights/
  *   POWEFF (to be submitted before Monday 23rd Oct)

10 min will be good for us to cover both.

Many thanks,
Marisol



Message: 2
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 13:06:28 -0700
From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" mailto:age...@ietf.org>>
To: mailto:jcla...@cisco.com>>, 
mailto:opsawg-cha...@ietf.org>>
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, 
rwil...@cisco.com
Subject: [OPSAWG] opsawg - Requested sessions have been scheduled for
IETF 118
Message-ID: 
<169722758803.19136.16369844994976782...@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Dear Joe Clarke,

The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled.
Below is the scheduled session information followed by
the original request.


opsawg Session 1 (2:00 requested)
Monday, 6 November 2023, Session II 1300-1500 Europe/Prague
Room Name: Ballroom size: 250
-
opsawg Session 2 (1:00 requested)
Wednesday, 8 November 2023, Session II 1300-1400 Europe/Prague
Room Name: Congress Hall 1 size: 250
-

Special Note: Combined OpsAWG / OpsAREA

iCalendar: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/sessions/opsawg.ics

Request Information:


-
Working Group Name: Operations and Management Area Working Group
Area Name: Operations and Management Area
Session Requester: Joe Clarke
First session joint with: opsarea

Number of Sessions: 2
Length of Session(s):
Number of Attendees: 70
Conflicts to Avoid:




Participants who must be present:
  Warren "Ace" Kumari

Resources Requested:

Special Requests:
  PLEASE NOTE: Combined OpsAWG / OpsAREA
-




Marisol Palmero
CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEA  | Cisco CPX TEAO | P: +34.91.201.2643 | M: 
+34.629.634.595

___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] [Inventory-yang] [CCAMP] [inventory-yang] poll for network inventory base model

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Hi chairs/WG

As I didn’t answer the initial survey yet, I thought I was still on time. I 
take the opportunity to base my answer on your analysis.

My preference is for the below option4, based more on the “simplicity and 
focus”, with the starting approach of draft-ietf-ccamp-network-inventory-yang , 
and as suggested, to extend and build on top of the initial HW use cases.

Regarding your second point, I would like to reiterate on the approach as part 
of the example shown in draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo, on the import&augmentation 
exercise (referred to in the appendix). We demonstrate how to extend the 
concept of “asset”, considering attributes that might not be initially 
considered in initial model, as they could be easily adopted and extended.

I vote for the so called option 4, as suggested below.

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero


From: Inventory-yang  on behalf of Daniele 
Ceccarelli 
Date: Friday, 15 September 2023 at 10:45
To: maqiufang (A) 
Cc: inventory-y...@ietf.org , ivy-cha...@ietf.org 
, opsawg , cc...@ietf.org 
Subject: Re: [Inventory-yang] [CCAMP] [inventory-yang] poll for network 
inventory base model
Hi working group,

Thanks a lot for all the useful comments on the different drafts.
There seems to be a split of preferences between option 1 and option 3. Given 
that the interinm meeting is soon (next week), we suggest to use it to further 
discuss suggestions and concerns from the working group and defer the decision 
by 1 week (Sep 22nd) immediately after the interim meeting.

In order to have a fruitful discussion at the interim meeting please consider 
the following inputs:


  *   Italo made a very good proposal on the split between HW only and HW+SW 
use cases. Is this something we want to pursue? Do you think it makes sense to 
start focusing on e.g. HW and then add SW on top of it?
  *   When asking to adopt one draft or the other we were asking (as per IETF 
process) which you consider to be a good starting point for the working group 
to work on, not something that is ready for publication. This means that 
whatever draft we decide to adopt, we can significantly update it to properly 
cover all the different aspects of invently. With this regard Alex did a very 
good analysis in his mail. Maybe we don't need to make an hard choice between 
the draft but take the best of each. For example: we can take 30% of one draft 
and 20% of the other and build a new one as per option 3, if on the other side 
we decide to take 80% from one draft, then it makes more sense to start from it 
and build on top of that.
  *   Another good point touched by Alex is the "equipment-room". We are 
supposed to cover also sites and location of the inventory. Are these things 
connected? it seems so. If the WG prefers not to address this in the core model 
and add it on top, that fine, otherwise we would suggest to have sites and 
location added (whetehr in che core model or added on top can be discussed).
Again we have a good proposal from Alex on the way forward, which is:


"For example, one could start with draft-ietf-ccamp-network-inventory-yang, 
modifying it to remove the network-hardware-inventory container and splitting 
the remaining module in two (for equipment-room and network-elements, both of 
which will now be top-level containers).  Remaining modifications can be made 
from there.  I guess this makes me a proponent of option 3, but with the caveat 
that this would not need to restart from scratch - really an option 4 that says 
merge (for overall structure and common parts, which in this case is possible) 
and split the remaining difference."
We don't really care whether this is called option 1, 3 or 4 but seems to be 
the most meaningful one...which is: use ccamp draft as a starting point, 
implementing the modifications suggested by Alex and then incorporate the 
material from the opsawg draft.

Given this deferral of the polling decision, if anyone else wants to ask for a 
10 mins slot at the interim, please do so now. We will put together the agenda 
on Monday.

Thanks you everyone
Daniele & Qiufang


On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 8:22 AM maqiufang (A) 
mailto:40huawei@dmarc.ietf.org>> 
wrote:
Hi Working Group,

It’s now time to start considering how to move forward with the inventory base 
model. We have two different documents that could be used as a starting point 
for our work or, in case the working group believes none of them is “good 
enough”, we can start a brand new ID.
In case the latter option is chosen, Daniele and I will write a -00 version 
including just the table of content and what we’d like to be covered in each 
section. The document will then be handed over to a pool of authors which will 
bring it till the WG adoption.

Hence, we will have a 3 weeks polling starting today. We decided to make it a 
bit longer than usual because this time the working group is requested to 
review two drafts instead of one.

This mail starts a 3 weeks polling, terminating on September 1

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Many thanks Med for your comments and suggestions,
We will incorporate them in the next release of the draft, as well as 
addressing your note of being more descriptive for the use cases.

Looking forward to discussing further on this new approach and get more 
constructive feedback as part of the preparations and IETF 117 WG meetings.

Marisol Palmero


From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com 
Date: Wednesday, 5 July 2023 at 16:42
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , opsawg@ietf.org 

Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Camilo Cardona 
Subject: RE: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt
Hi Marisol, all,

Thank you for sharing this version.

I like much this new version/approach/scope of the draft compared to the dmlmo 
draft I reviewed early this year. I expect more concrete description to be 
added to some of the use cases, but I trust that is something you can manage in 
the next iteration of the draft.

FWIW, please find some few edits/comments at:

  *   pdf: 
https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/blob/master/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00-rev%20Med.pdf
  *   doc: 
https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00-rev%20Med.doc

Cheers,
Med

De : OPSAWG  De la part de Marisol Palmero Amador 
(mpalmero)
Envoyé : vendredi 30 juin 2023 02:23
À : opsawg@ietf.org
Cc : Sudhendu Kumar ; Camilo Cardona 
Objet : [OPSAWG] Fwd: New Version Notification for 
draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt

Dear OPSA WG,

We've just posted a new draft that presents a problem statement for assets 
lifecycle management and operations. It describes motivation and introduces an 
information model proposal for the main modules that are part of 
DMLMO<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/>.

The new draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo/ 
intents  to simplify the objective and understanding of DMLMO with a focus on 
the framework and the main functional models.

We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero,  on behalf of the authors.


From: internet-dra...@ietf.org<mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org> 
mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org>>
Date: Friday, 30 June 2023 at 02:06
To: Camilo Cardona mailto:cam...@ntt.net>>, Diego R. Lopez 
mailto:diego.r.lo...@telefonica.com>>, Frank 
Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>, Marisol 
Palmero Amador (mpalmero) mailto:mpalm...@cisco.com>>, 
Sudhendu Kumar mailto:skuma...@ncsu.edu>>
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:   draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo
Revision:   00
Title:  Asset Lifecycle Management and Operations, Problem Statement
Document date:  2023-06-29
Group:  Individual Submission
Pages:  12
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt
Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo/
Htmlized:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo


Abstract:
   This document presents a problem statement for assets lifecycle
   management and operations.  It describes the framework, the
   motivation and requirements for asset-centric metrics including but
   not limited to asset adoption, usability, entitlements, supported
   features and capabilities, enabled features and capabilities.  An
   information model is proposed whose primary objective is to measure
   and improve the network operators' experience along the lifecycle
   journey, from technical requirements and technology selection through
   renewal, including the end of life of an asset.




The IETF Secretariat



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

[OPSAWG] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA WG,

We've just posted a new draft that presents a problem statement for assets 
lifecycle management and operations. It describes motivation and introduces an 
information model proposal for the main modules that are part of 
DMLMO<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/>.

The new draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo/ 
intents  to simplify the objective and understanding of DMLMO with a focus on 
the framework and the main functional models.

We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero,  on behalf of the authors.


From: internet-dra...@ietf.org 
Date: Friday, 30 June 2023 at 02:06
To: Camilo Cardona , Diego R. Lopez 
, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
Sudhendu Kumar 
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:   draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo
Revision:   00
Title:  Asset Lifecycle Management and Operations, Problem Statement
Document date:  2023-06-29
Group:  Individual Submission
Pages:  12
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo-00.txt
Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo/
Htmlized:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-ps-almo


Abstract:
   This document presents a problem statement for assets lifecycle
   management and operations.  It describes the framework, the
   motivation and requirements for asset-centric metrics including but
   not limited to asset adoption, usability, entitlements, supported
   features and capabilities, enabled features and capabilities.  An
   information model is proposed whose primary objective is to measure
   and improve the network operators' experience along the lifecycle
   journey, from technical requirements and technology selection through
   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

Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption call for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Hi Mohamed,
Many thanks for your review and good comments.

After the IETF #116 OPSA WG and discussions on the inventory email alias/NIMBY 
new charter discussions; we understand that there is work to do and we are 
reviewing the YANG modules being part of DMLMO, including structure; we are 
already starting to work on the next review, and we are considering all your 
comments/notes.

Many thanks,
Marisol

Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption call for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09

mohamed.boucad...@orange.com Fri, 17 March 
2023 14:54 UTCShow 
header

Hi all,



FWIW, please find below a review of this draft:





  *   pdf: 
https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09-rev%20Med.pdf

  *   doc: 
https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09-rev%20Med.doc



I support the overall effort to provide a common (set of) model(s) to 
complement existing the in-house tools (e.g., industrialize collection of 
EoL/EoS) with the hope that inventory data is not kept stale and that it is 
actively updated.



However, I think that some more effort is needed to better scope this work. I 
don't think that the document is ready in its current state. Some "diet" effort 
is needed to keep only core components and offload other parts to 
future/companion extensions.



I have also many comments on the yang structure itself (lack of structure 
types, abuse of string, lack of meaningful descriptions, etc.), but I guess 
these can be fixed once the high level concern is handled.



Aaah, rather than "Cisco and Ohers", I suggest you simply rely in the PEN 
registry. Here is an example:



   leaf vendor-id {

 type uint32;

 description

   "The Vendor ID is a security vendor's Private Enterprise

Number as registered with IANA.";

 reference

   "IANA: Private Enterprise Numbers


(https://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers/)";

   }



Thank you.



Cheers,

Med


___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

[OPSAWG] IPR Poll on draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear chairs,

Im not aware about any IPR related to this draft

Many Thanks,
Marisol

Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 01:27:38 +
From: Tianran Zhou mailto:zhoutian...@huawei.com>>
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" 
mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>>
Cc: "opsawg-cha...@ietf.org" 
mailto:opsawg-cha...@ietf.org>>
Subject: [OPSAWG] IPR Poll on draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09
Message-ID: 
<5ad1fd8f622b49ea9eb33a1247144...@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi Authors and Contributors,

Accompany with the WG adoption on this draft, I'd like all authors and 
contributors to confirm on the list.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/

Please respond if you are aware of any IPR related to this draft.
If you are aware of IPR, please indicate whether or not this has been disclosed 
per IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3669, 5378, and 8179).

Thanks,
Tianran
Marisol Palmero
CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEA  | Cisco CPX TEAO | P: +34.91.201.2643 | M: 
+34.629.634.595

___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

HI Fengchong,


Thanks for your email.  Related to the ietf-lmo-incident-management YANG 
module<mailto:ietf-lmo-incident-managem...@2022-09-20.yang>


The YANG module doesn’t contain and doesn’t have the objective to include the 
insight of the incident: if any negative impact is involved on the incident, 
ietf-lmo-incident-management is not covering such use case.

The main objective for ietf-lmo-incident-management:

A user might decide to record and report any incident faced, related to asset, 
entitlement or feature (please note that we might need to include entitlement 
and feature to the “Incident class” definition in the draft, only asset is 
mentioned)

Mainly the module covers incident management attributes to handle incidents, 
but doesn’t go to the analysis of those incidents. It is a good catch though as 
the incident might be raised automatically. In our case, the module doesn’t go 
to details of the specific alarm raised(if any) related to the incident, or the 
threshold crossed that might raise that alarm/incident.

ietf-lmo-incident-management should cover the use case when the incident occurs 
a ticket much be dispatched.

Hth,
Marisol



From: Inventory-yang  on behalf of Fengchong 
(frank) 
Date: Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 03:19
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
Tianran Zhou , opsawg@ietf.org 
, Rob Wilton (rwilton) 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 
, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, inventory-y...@ietf.org 
Subject: [Inventory-yang] 答复: New Version Notification for 
draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt
Hi Marisol,
   I’m the author of draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management, in this document,  
alarms, metrics and  some trace information can be aggregated into an incident, 
incident often have negative impact on network services.

I have some questions about the concept of incident in your document.

  1.  Does the incident contains the negative impact on network services? I see 
network service are one type of asset.
  2.  Is alarm also an incident? Or only root cause problem is an incident?
  3.  Metrics break the threshold, is this situation treated as incident?
  4.  If an incident occurs, a ticket must be dispatched?


发件人: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Marisol Palmero Amador 
(mpalmero)
发送时间: 2023年3月21日 8:36
收件人: Tianran Zhou ; opsawg@ietf.org; 
Rob Wilton (rwilton) 
抄送: Sudhendu Kumar ; Shwetha Bhandari 
; Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
; inventory-y...@ietf.org
主题: Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt

Many thanks for your email,

Just to clarify our approach to “dis-engage” from the inventory drafts/RFC’s 
discussions:

  *   The asset module, doesn’t contain any more “inventory” on the name of the 
module,
  *   it was reduced drastically to consume from any existing inventory 
RFC/draft reference.
  *   Asset module cannot be eliminated from the DMLMO draft because it needs 
still to host the link to “entitlement” and “feature/usage”.
  *   Asset represents refers to hardware, software, applications, or services. 
From my research, inventory related drafts are dedicated to hardware or 
software, independently, what means that we have to relay on the asset module 
to be able to make that reference.


The mentioned Incident-management draft has been recently submitted; from my 
reading the approach is different from the incident-management module in DMLMO:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management/
v00 released March-13 2023


In DMLMO, incident management module includes the incident management 
attributes to handle incidents. Where incident refers to the record and report 
of any problem the user has faced with the asset, feature or entitlement.




Many Thanks,
Marisol Palmero


From: Tianran Zhou 
mailto:zhoutianran=40huawei@dmarc.ietf.org>>
Date: Thursday, 16 March 2023 at 07:43
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) 
mailto:mpalm...@cisco.com>>, 
opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> 
mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>>, Rob Wilton (rwilton) 
mailto:rwil...@cisco.com>>
Cc: Camilo Cardona 
mailto:juancamilo.card...@imdea.org>>, Frank 
Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>, Diego R. 
Lopez mailto:diego.r.lo...@telefonica.com>>, 
Shwetha Bhandari 
mailto:shwetha.bhand...@thoughtspot.com>>, 
Sudhendu Kumar 
mailto:sudhendu.kumar@gmail.com>>, Eric 
Vyncke (evyncke) mailto:evyn...@cisco.com>>, 
inventory-y...@ietf.org<mailto:inventory-y...@ietf.org> 
mailto:inventory-y...@ietf.org>>, Jan Lindblad 
(jlindbla) mailto:jlind...@cisco.com>>
Subject: RE: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt
Hi Marisol,

Thanks very much for this revision. It’s good to see you think about the 
adaption to other inventory models.
Here I would like to raise my proposal on the inventory collaboration.
I think this draft covers too many things. My understanding, according to 
figure 1,  the focus shou

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Many thanks for your email,

Just to clarify our approach to “dis-engage” from the inventory drafts/RFC’s 
discussions:

  *   The asset module, doesn’t contain any more “inventory” on the name of the 
module,
  *   it was reduced drastically to consume from any existing inventory 
RFC/draft reference.
  *   Asset module cannot be eliminated from the DMLMO draft because it needs 
still to host the link to “entitlement” and “feature/usage”.
  *   Asset represents refers to hardware, software, applications, or services. 
From my research, inventory related drafts are dedicated to hardware or 
software, independently, what means that we have to relay on the asset module 
to be able to make that reference.


The mentioned Incident-management draft has been recently submitted; from my 
reading the approach is different from the incident-management module in DMLMO:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management/
v00 released March-13 2023


In DMLMO, incident management module includes the incident management 
attributes to handle incidents. Where incident refers to the record and report 
of any problem the user has faced with the asset, feature or entitlement.




Many Thanks,
Marisol Palmero


From: Tianran Zhou 
Date: Thursday, 16 March 2023 at 07:43
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , opsawg@ietf.org 
, Rob Wilton (rwilton) 
Cc: Camilo Cardona , Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
, Diego R. Lopez , Shwetha 
Bhandari , Sudhendu Kumar 
, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) , 
inventory-y...@ietf.org , Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 

Subject: RE: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt
Hi Marisol,

Thanks very much for this revision. It’s good to see you think about the 
adaption to other inventory models.
Here I would like to raise my proposal on the inventory collaboration.
I think this draft covers too many things. My understanding, according to 
figure 1,  the focus should be on Entitlements and Usage.
The Asset has many overlap with the inventory model. I am thinking if you can 
just reuse the ietf inventory model, i.e., not to define a new asset.
So that, all the ietf models could build a big picture. The ietf inventory 
model can deal with the mapping to openconfig model.
So this draft can also reduce the mapping work.

I see there is a new specific  Incident draft 
“draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management”.  Maybe you can also reuse this.

What’s your thoughts?

Best,
Tianran


From: Inventory-yang [mailto:inventory-yang-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2023 1:58 AM
To: opsawg@ietf.org; Rob Wilton (rwilton) 
Cc: Camilo Cardona ; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
; Diego R. Lopez ; Shwetha 
Bhandari ; Sudhendu Kumar 
; Eric Vyncke (evyncke) ; 
inventory-y...@ietf.org; Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
Subject: [Inventory-yang] 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<mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org> 
mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org>>
Date: Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 18:28
To: Camilo Cardona mailto:cam...@ntt.net>>, Diego Lopez 
mailto:diego.r.lo...@telefonica.com>>, Frank 
Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>, Marisol 
Palmero Amador (mpalmero) mailto:mpalm...@cisco.com>>, 
Shwetha Bhandari 
mailto:shwetha.bhand...@thoughtspot.com>>, 
Sudhendu Kumar mailto: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:

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

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) 
Date: Friday, 10 March 2023 at 21:50
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , opsawg@ietf.org 
, Rob Wilton (rwilton) 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 
, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, 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  on behalf of Marisol Palmero Amador 
(mpalmero) 
Date: Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:58
To: opsawg@ietf.org , Rob Wilton (rwilton) 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 
, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) 
, 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 
Date: Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 18:28
To: Camilo Cardona , Diego Lopez 
, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
Shwetha Bhandari , Sudhendu Kumar 

Subject: New Versi

[OPSAWG] Request Call for Adoption: DMLMO draft

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

 Dear Chairs,

The authors for the DMLMO draft would like to go ahead and request Call for 
Adoption for the draft
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/

Please note that DMLMO(from v09) can actually rely to any inventory YANG data 
model that need to be considered.

Many thanks,
Marisol for the authors


___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Hi Bo,
Answering your questions here:
1)
Identities for offer-type-t can be extended, those might not be limited to the 
identities listed in the draft.
Please recall that assets related to hardware, software, applications, or 
services. An asset can be physical or virtual.

Note:
There is a good catch on your question! we will replace license terms by 
entitlement terms as we did for the other YANG data modules for offer-type-t

offer-type-t relates to assets or features, as entitlements could be related to 
both, we will modify this  on the description in our next release

2)
An entitlement is a class of LMO, because it is part of the Lifecycle 
Management and Operations of the asset.
If needed more clarification in the descriptions, we will add into it, also in 
the next release.


I hope it clarifies, please let me know if this is not the case.
Many thanks
Marisol Palmero


From: Inventory-yang  on behalf of Wubo (lana) 

Date: Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 13:18
To: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
Wubo (lana) , opsawg@ietf.org 
, inventory-y...@ietf.org 
Subject: Re: [Inventory-yang] New Version Notification for 
draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt
Hi Marisol,

Thanks for your question. The note is about the questions on the definition of 
entitlement/license in the asset YANG model.

1)It seems the following is related to the attributes of the inventory, such as 
whether the license is applied to hardware, or deployed in the enterprise 
sites, etc..Correct?
  identity offer-type-t {
description
  "License Offer Type, part of the plan to generate revenue
   for specific asset";
  }
  identity perpetual-software {
  base offer-type-t;
  description
  "Perpetual softwar gives the user the right to use the
   program indefinitely";
  }
  identity standalone-hardware {
  base offer-type-t;
  description
  "Standalone hardware is able to function independently
   of other hardware";
  }
  identity on-premise-software-subscription {
  base offer-type-t;
  description
  "On-Premise software subscription, relates to a temporary
   on-prem licencing model, allowing users to pay a per user
   fee";
  }
  identity cloud-software-saas-subscription {
  base offer-type-t;
  description
  "Cloud Software (SaaS) subscription is a service busines
   model where the user is entitled to use the cloud software
   for a specific time period";
  }
  identity third-party-software {
  base offer-type-t;
  description
  "It includes licenses, entitlements, agreements, obligations
  or other commitment under which the user can use the asset
  not directly sold by the manufacturer";
  }
  identity flex-cloud-prem-subscription {
  base offer-type-t;
  description
  "Flex Cloud-Prem subscription allows software vendors to
  limit the number of entitlements for the use of the specific
  asset";
  }

2) :The draft says the focus is on asset-centric lifecycle management and refer 
it as Lifecycle Management and Operations (LMO). Could you elaborate on why an 
entitlement is also a class of lmo?
A entitlement is a class of lmo that represents how the asset(s) or feature(s) 
can be leveraged and what is required in cases the asset(s) or feature(s) are 
changed


Thanks,
Bo


From: Inventory-yang [mailto:inventory-yang-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2023 6:53 PM
To: Wubo (lana) ; opsawg@ietf.org; 
inventory-y...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Inventory-yang] New Version Notification for 
draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt

Hi Bo,
Could you please elaborate on your note?

>From your email:
Regarding licenses (or entitlements in draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09), some 
licenses may affect the functions of physical components or software 
components, though having removed from the current model, but we feel further 
discussion is needed.


Please let me know how I could help to clarify or facilitate the discussion,
Many thanks,
Marisol

Marisol Palmero
CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEA  | Cisco CPX TEAO | P: +34.91.201.2643 | M: 
+34.629.634.595


From: Inventory-yang 
mailto:inventory-yang-boun...@ietf.org>> on 
behalf of Wubo (lana) 
mailto:lana.wubo=40huawei@dmarc.ietf.org>>
Date: Thursday, 16 February 2023 at 11:02
To: opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> 
mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>>, 
inventory-y...@ietf.org<mailto:inventory-y...@ietf.org> 
mailto:inventory-y...@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [Inventory-yang] New Version Notification for 
draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt
Dear Opsawg, inventory colleges,

Based on the review comments from Marisol and authors of 
draft-ietf-ccamp-network-inventory-yang, we update the network invent

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Hi Bo,
Could you please elaborate on your note?

>From your email:
Regarding licenses (or entitlements in draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09), some 
licenses may affect the functions of physical components or software 
components, though having removed from the current model, but we feel further 
discussion is needed.


Please let me know how I could help to clarify or facilitate the discussion,
Many thanks,
Marisol

Marisol Palmero
CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEA  | Cisco CPX TEAO | P: +34.91.201.2643 | M: 
+34.629.634.595


From: Inventory-yang  on behalf of Wubo (lana) 

Date: Thursday, 16 February 2023 at 11:02
To: opsawg@ietf.org , inventory-y...@ietf.org 

Subject: Re: [Inventory-yang] New Version Notification for 
draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt
Dear Opsawg, inventory colleges,

Based on the review comments from Marisol and authors of 
draft-ietf-ccamp-network-inventory-yang, we update the network inventory draft.

Compared with the network hardware inventory in CCAMP, this model has following 
consideration:
1) Augment RFC 8345, so that the logical L2 or L3 or TE network topology can 
have mapping association with underlying physical infrastructure inventory. 
Therefore, a new " network-inventory" network type has been defined.
2) More device and device component types are supported, such as device 
software component, virtual network devices and network endpoint devices.

Regarding licenses (or entitlements in draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09), some 
licenses may affect the functions of physical components or software 
components, though having removed from the current model, but we feel further 
discussion is needed.

Thanks,
Bo

-Original Message-
From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org]
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2023 7:04 PM
To: Wubo (lana) ; Cheng Zhou 
; Mohamed Boucadair 
; Qin Wu ; Qin Wu 

Subject: New Version Notification for 
draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt


A new version of I-D, draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt
has been successfully submitted by Bo Wu and posted to the IETF repository.

Name:   draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management
Revision:   01
Title:  An Inventory Management Model for Enterprise Networks
Document date:  2023-02-10
Group:  Individual Submission
Pages:  28
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01.txt
Status: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management/
Htmlized:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management
Diff:   
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-wzwb-opsawg-network-inventory-management-01

Abstract:
   This document defines a YANG model for network inventory management,
   which provides consistent representation and reporting of network
   nodes (including endpoints) inventory and enable a network
   orchestrator in the enterprise network to maintain a centralized view
   of all the endpoint types across multiple domains of the underlying
   network to implement a coherent control strategy.




The IETF Secretariat



--
Inventory-yang mailing list
inventory-y...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/inventory-yang
___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

[OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-09.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

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 
Date: Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 18:28
To: Camilo Cardona , Diego Lopez 
, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) , 
Shwetha Bhandari , Sudhendu Kumar 

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

Re: [OPSAWG] Enterprise Inventory Management Side meeting Invitation (Tuesday 8:30~9:30 Mezzanine 12 )

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Here is the table I’ve shared during the meeting, in md format

Marisol

Marisol Palmero
CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEA  | Cisco CPX TEAO | P: +34.91.201.2643 | M: 
+34.629.634.595


From: Joe Clarke (jclarke) 
Date: Tuesday, 8 November 2022 at 10:04
To: Qin Wu , opsawg , 
opsawg-cha...@ietf.org 
Cc: Wubo (lana) , mohamed.boucad...@orange.com 
, Diego R. Lopez , 
Camilo Cardona , Shwetha Bhandari 
, Sudhendu Kumar 
, Oscar González de Dios 
, opsawg-cha...@ietf.org 
, Aihua Guo , Italo Busi 
, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) , 
Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) 
Subject: Re: Enterprise Inventory Management Side meeting Invitation (Tuesday 
8:30~9:30 Mezzanine 12 )
Seems I messed up a setting.  I’ve started the Webex now if you want to use it.

Joe

From: Qin Wu 
Date: Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 03:21
To: opsawg , opsawg-cha...@ietf.org 
Cc: Wubo (lana) , mohamed.boucad...@orange.com 
, Diego R. Lopez , 
Camilo Cardona , Shwetha Bhandari 
, Sudhendu Kumar 
, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com 
, Oscar González de Dios 
, opsawg-cha...@ietf.org 
, Aihua Guo , Italo Busi 
, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) , 
Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) 
Subject: RE: Enterprise Inventory Management Side meeting Invitation (Tuesday 
8:30~9:30 Mezzanine 12 )
Hi, All

We got trouble to get access to webex link which require approval. I plan to 
abandon webex and use Zoom link instead, sorry to bring you inconvenience


inventory_ref_standards_drafts.md
Description: inventory_ref_standards_drafts.md
___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA working group,
Notes from today´s DMLMO regular side meeting are updated:
https://notes.ietf.org/s/jEUXpW1XR

**IETF DMLMO side meeting (Jun/8)

Attendees:
Ignacio Dominguez
Camilo Cardona
Marisol Palmero

Meeting notes/updates:

  *   Inventory: waiting for AD & CCAMP and OPSA WG Chairs to determine next 
steps for inventory related YANG modules.
  *   License: work in progress identifying common use cases
  *   Features: work in progress identifying common use cases
Review from current DMLMO v04 version is required:

  *   Draft V04 is missing YANG modules, even they are listed through YANG 
trees. This is a problem from python script we use to build the xml/txt 
version. We will get it fixed, generating a new version.
  *   ietf-lmo-user YANG module implementation doesnt differenciate between: 
Owner / Consumer
  *   Asset is limited to be linked to one "user", asset might be considered to 
be linked to several users, being consumer, owner, or other roles.

Next meeting is planned for June 29th

Many thanks,
Marisol Palmero

___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA working group,
Notes from the DMLMO regular side meeting are updated:
https://notes.ietf.org/s/jEUXpW1XR



** IETF DMLMO side meeting (Apr/20)

Attendees
Luis M Contreras
Diego Lopez
Camilo Cardona
Eric Vyncke
Marisol Palmero

Meeting notes/updates:

  *   Inventory: waiting for AD & CCAMP and OPSA WG Chairs to determine next 
steps for inventory related YANG modules.
  *   License:
slides have been updated with a few common licenses use cases, that have been 
working together Camilo, Shwetha and Marisol: 
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/143-D3kRFKqqGd2OPUj_kqW7l31TtZjUfVeMYkdzbv7U/edit?usp=sharing

Common use cases have been presented and commented during the meeting:
* X number of nodes(assets) as part of a “cluster” asset
* X number of features to be covered by a license
* Licence is linked to all-assets through an “all-asset” attribute. Suggested 
to review the name for this attribute
* Licenses could also be restricted to different kind of resources than just 
time, i.e., “memory”, “cpu”, “BW limit”, measured in different units, or with a 
certain maximum value

To review:

  *   include Cloud Subscription License Use Case
  *   Need to enumerate use cases coverage in draft
  *   Include example of BW on Demand, as resource-consumption from a 
feature/usage point of view and from resource point of view covered by license

Appreciate your comments and feedback,

Many Thanks,

Marisol Palmero

___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

[OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA working group,
Notes from the DMLMO regular side meeting are updated:
https://notes.ietf.org/s/jEUXpW1XR

** IETF DMLMO side meeting (Apr/06)
Attendees
Eric Vyncke
Marisol Palmero
Meeting notes/updates:

  *   Inventory: based on feedback from previous onsite meeting IETF #113, we 
are following with the AD & CCAMP and OPSA WG Chairs to decide which inventory 
YANG modules we should/could consume. From inventory perspective, DMLMO draft 
will need to align the “asset” concept to existing inventory YANG modules, 
considering that an asset refers to hardware, software, applications, or 
services; and it can be physical or virtual.
  *   License: based on feedback from previous IETF #113 onsite meeting, we are 
working to cover common use cases for licence YANG module. Within the use 
cases, we are looking to include contraints that might be different from just 
time, i.e. licenses that can be limited by the number of cpus, vcpus, users, 
limit BW, and other possible consumption models. A proposal is available for 
discussion under:
https://github.com/marisolpalmero/DMLMO/blob/fix-license/YangModules/ietf-lmo-licenses.yang

Appreciate your comments and feedback,

Thanks,

Marisol Palmero

___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA working group,
Please find notes and recording from DMLMO draft side meeting today:
Recording(Password: BybFjhp8):
https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/ldr.php?RCID=eb11f604da67f3e60ae667a0a6f60b5c

Attendees

  *   Nagendra Kumar
  *   Diego Lopez
  *   Benoit Claise
  *   Marisol Palmero
We got declined:

  *   Eric Vyncke
  *   Shwetha Bhandari
  *   Camilo Cardona
Meeting notes/updates:

  *   DMLMO v03 submitted for IETF v03:

  *   “hierarchy” concept: Asset/subasset, feature/subfeature, license subasset
  *   Cross reference between the modules: 1:1 or 1:N
  *   In this cross reference, the modules can be augmented
Benefits: Capability of extention, integration, flexibility, scalability

  *   License Use Cases, might be challenging to cover multivendor scenario. 
Together with Camilo and Shwetha, we are working on it, and even we know we 
will not be able to cover all scenarios, we want to demostrate that we can 
cover some initial scenarios and demostrate on it.
  *   New Organization/Service and User modules have been included in the 
current draft, being considered as a proof of flexibilty and scalability.


Next side meeting is scheduled during IETF 113 event. I check with individuals, 
as not everybody will be onsite. But it will be good to have sometime together 
before  Thursday OPSA meeting slot.

Many Thanks,
Marisol


From: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) 
Date: Wednesday, 23 February 2022 at 17:01
To: opsawg@ietf.org 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 
, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
, Camilo Cardona , Diego R. 
Lopez , 
luismiguel.contrerasmuri...@telefonica.com 
, Benoit Claise 
, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) 

Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

Hi,

DMLMO side meeting today has got a reduced audience, due to other priorities.
It was a short call and here are the notes:
https://notes.ietf.org/s/jEUXpW1XR

** IETF DMLMO side meeting (Feb/23)

Attendees

Eric Vyncke
Marisol Palmero



We got declined from:

Luis M Contreras
Diego Lopez
Camilo Cardona
Frank B.
Shwetha


Meeting notes:
* As we talked during previous meeting, we are considering to add a more 
flexible data structure, not only to cover "organization" attribute in asset(s) 
module; but also to be considered on the original "asset", "license" and 
"usage" containers. In this way, we will have a flexible and recursive 
implementation where there is introduced a more flexible model to cover this 
concept of parent-child/hierarchy (referred as "sub-asset", "sub-license", 
"sub-feature") as considered in the current DMLMO YANG modules.

* Together with Shwetha and Camilo, we are reviewing how licenses will iterate 
through feature-usage and asset(s), currently work in progress,  we will 
provide an update during next call.

* In order to present and update in the coming  OPSAWG IETF 113 meeting, we are 
looking to submit a new release for the DMLMO draft by end of next week.

* For next IETF 113 event, it will be good to know how many people with 
interest on DMLMO will be present during that Wednesday-Thursday in Vienna. 
Still considering to be onsite, but it might be a good opportunity to have a 
life discussion during that week.

Many Thanks,
Marisol


From: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) 
Date: Wednesday, 9 February 2022 at 21:31
To: opsawg@ietf.org 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 
, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
, Camilo Cardona , Diego R. 
Lopez , 
luismiguel.contrerasmuri...@telefonica.com 
, Benoit Claise 
, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) 

Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting
Sharing with the WG the meeting notes from the DMLMO side meeting:
https://notes.ietf.org/s/jEUXpW1XR


**IETF DMLMO side meeting (Feb/9)

Attendees

Benoit Claise Luis M Contreras Eric Vyncke Yannis Viniotis Diego Lopez Camilo 
Cardona Sudhendu Kumar Marisol Palmero

Recording: 
https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/ldr.php?RCID=00214551ba5a70290a179fa473cfe04d 
Password: hXN3JDp3

  *   Meeting notes:
  *   Agreed that meeting will be moved to 15:00 CET
  *   Quick intro from the different participants (this will be done just for 
this first meeting)
  *   Review Current YANG modules attributes - Marisol to list a few changes 
for next call including:
 *   Address for assets (MAC/IP), with purpose being management of the asset
 *   Organization - Consider organizational hierarchy. Marisol to prepare a 
proposal for next call
  *   Licenses - Camilo
 *   Considering additional attributes for licenses to cover “combo” 
options for feature&assets, including a possible concept as “License Catalog” 
notes:
 *   Benoit & Eric: Licensing is a complex topic.
 *   Camilo: Intention is to simplify the complexity: focusing on "Feature 
to a license" vs "Asset to a license"
 *   Diego: I believe the licensing model is very much connected with 
granularity
  *   Lifecycle for (V)NF vs YANG modules (OSM) - Dieg

Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Hi,

DMLMO side meeting today has got a reduced audience, due to other priorities.
It was a short call and here are the notes:
https://notes.ietf.org/s/jEUXpW1XR

** IETF DMLMO side meeting (Feb/23)

Attendees

Eric Vyncke
Marisol Palmero



We got declined from:

Luis M Contreras
Diego Lopez
Camilo Cardona
Frank B.
Shwetha


Meeting notes:
* As we talked during previous meeting, we are considering to add a more 
flexible data structure, not only to cover "organization" attribute in asset(s) 
module; but also to be considered on the original "asset", "license" and 
"usage" containers. In this way, we will have a flexible and recursive 
implementation where there is introduced a more flexible model to cover this 
concept of parent-child/hierarchy (referred as "sub-asset", "sub-license", 
"sub-feature") as considered in the current DMLMO YANG modules.

* Together with Shwetha and Camilo, we are reviewing how licenses will iterate 
through feature-usage and asset(s), currently work in progress,  we will 
provide an update during next call.

* In order to present and update in the coming  OPSAWG IETF 113 meeting, we are 
looking to submit a new release for the DMLMO draft by end of next week.

* For next IETF 113 event, it will be good to know how many people with 
interest on DMLMO will be present during that Wednesday-Thursday in Vienna. 
Still considering to be onsite, but it might be a good opportunity to have a 
life discussion during that week.

Many Thanks,
Marisol


From: Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) 
Date: Wednesday, 9 February 2022 at 21:31
To: opsawg@ietf.org 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 
, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
, Camilo Cardona , Diego R. 
Lopez , 
luismiguel.contrerasmuri...@telefonica.com 
, Benoit Claise 
, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) 

Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting
Sharing with the WG the meeting notes from the DMLMO side meeting:
https://notes.ietf.org/s/jEUXpW1XR


**IETF DMLMO side meeting (Feb/9)

Attendees

Benoit Claise Luis M Contreras Eric Vyncke Yannis Viniotis Diego Lopez Camilo 
Cardona Sudhendu Kumar Marisol Palmero

Recording: 
https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/ldr.php?RCID=00214551ba5a70290a179fa473cfe04d 
Password: hXN3JDp3

  *   Meeting notes:
  *   Agreed that meeting will be moved to 15:00 CET
  *   Quick intro from the different participants (this will be done just for 
this first meeting)
  *   Review Current YANG modules attributes - Marisol to list a few changes 
for next call including:
 *   Address for assets (MAC/IP), with purpose being management of the asset
 *   Organization - Consider organizational hierarchy. Marisol to prepare a 
proposal for next call
  *   Licenses - Camilo
 *   Considering additional attributes for licenses to cover “combo” 
options for feature&assets, including a possible concept as “License Catalog” 
notes:
 *   Benoit & Eric: Licensing is a complex topic.
 *   Camilo: Intention is to simplify the complexity: focusing on "Feature 
to a license" vs "Asset to a license"
 *   Diego: I believe the licensing model is very much connected with 
granularity
  *   Lifecycle for (V)NF vs YANG modules (OSM) - Diego
  *   Tracking table in ppt: Marisol to create Tasks for each topic and include:
 *   Evolve attributes for “Assets in use”
  *   RoundTable
 *   Luis: Review HW and SW disaggregation
 *   Inventory Management, discussing 2 options:
*   as per IETF112 OPSAWG discussion, we can raise topic to the chair 
and propose a follow up conversation.
*   review DMLMO current model how an asset is defined, and the 
attributes linked to it. Review the concept of asset definition and how it 
links to inventory. We will address this in next call
thanks,

Marisol Palmero


From: Marisol Palmero 
Date: Wednesday, 2 February 2022 at 17:09
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 
, "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" 
, Camilo Cardona , "Diego R. 
Lopez" 
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

Just to inform the WG,
We have hosted a preparation call in order to start the “DMLMO draft” side 
meetings next week:

**IETF DMLMO side meeting kick-off (Feb/2)**

Attendees
* Sudhendu
* Shwetha
* Marisol
* Frank

** DMLMO side meetings are bi-weekly, starting Feb/9 - 7am PST **

* meetings notes will be typed from:
https://notes.ietf.org/ZOfqY-9CSr2SYVeWFfEFsw?both
(to be updated in git repo)

* Preparation slides in google docs:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/143-D3kRFKqqGd2OPUj_kqW7l31TtZjUfVeMYkdzbv7U/edit?usp=sharing


Initial list of topics to review & discuss:

* "Organizations" in YANG
* Licenses linked to Features vs Assets/ License “Catalog”
* LifeCycle for (V)NF vs existing YANG modules
* Inventory, DMLMO doesnt´t have an objective to focus on inventory management, 
but the group is open to collabora

Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Sharing with the WG the meeting notes from the DMLMO side meeting:
https://notes.ietf.org/s/jEUXpW1XR


**IETF DMLMO side meeting (Feb/9)

Attendees

Benoit Claise Luis M Contreras Eric Vyncke Yannis Viniotis Diego Lopez Camilo 
Cardona Sudhendu Kumar Marisol Palmero

Recording: 
https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/ldr.php?RCID=00214551ba5a70290a179fa473cfe04d 
Password: hXN3JDp3

  *   Meeting notes:
  *   Agreed that meeting will be moved to 15:00 CET
  *   Quick intro from the different participants (this will be done just for 
this first meeting)
  *   Review Current YANG modules attributes - Marisol to list a few changes 
for next call including:
 *   Address for assets (MAC/IP), with purpose being management of the asset
 *   Organization - Consider organizational hierarchy. Marisol to prepare a 
proposal for next call
  *   Licenses - Camilo
 *   Considering additional attributes for licenses to cover “combo” 
options for feature&assets, including a possible concept as “License Catalog” 
notes:
 *   Benoit & Eric: Licensing is a complex topic.
 *   Camilo: Intention is to simplify the complexity: focusing on "Feature 
to a license" vs "Asset to a license"
 *   Diego: I believe the licensing model is very much connected with 
granularity
  *   Lifecycle for (V)NF vs YANG modules (OSM) - Diego
  *   Tracking table in ppt: Marisol to create Tasks for each topic and include:
 *   Evolve attributes for “Assets in use”
  *   RoundTable
 *   Luis: Review HW and SW disaggregation
 *   Inventory Management, discussing 2 options:
*   as per IETF112 OPSAWG discussion, we can raise topic to the chair 
and propose a follow up conversation.
*   review DMLMO current model how an asset is defined, and the 
attributes linked to it. Review the concept of asset definition and how it 
links to inventory. We will address this in next call
thanks,

Marisol Palmero


From: Marisol Palmero 
Date: Wednesday, 2 February 2022 at 17:09
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 
, "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" 
, Camilo Cardona , "Diego R. 
Lopez" 
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

Just to inform the WG,
We have hosted a preparation call in order to start the “DMLMO draft” side 
meetings next week:

**IETF DMLMO side meeting kick-off (Feb/2)**

Attendees
* Sudhendu
* Shwetha
* Marisol
* Frank

** DMLMO side meetings are bi-weekly, starting Feb/9 - 7am PST **

* meetings notes will be typed from:
https://notes.ietf.org/ZOfqY-9CSr2SYVeWFfEFsw?both
(to be updated in git repo)

* Preparation slides in google docs:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/143-D3kRFKqqGd2OPUj_kqW7l31TtZjUfVeMYkdzbv7U/edit?usp=sharing


Initial list of topics to review & discuss:

* "Organizations" in YANG
* Licenses linked to Features vs Assets/ License “Catalog”
* LifeCycle for (V)NF vs existing YANG modules
* Inventory, DMLMO doesnt´t have an objective to focus on inventory management, 
but the group is open to collaborate and even consumed from other efforts.
* Round table

Marisol Palmero


From: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" 
Date: Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 16:47
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" , Marisol Palmero 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 

Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

Marisol, while you work to refine this document ahead of any potential WG 
adoption, please bring back any relevant discussions to this list so you have a 
record of interest.  Comments from interested parties will help gauge interest 
should you wish to have opsawg adopt this document.

Thanks.

Joe
On 1/25/22 15:41, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) wrote:
Dear OPSA WG,


We would like to extend this invitation to the OPSA WG to participate and 
collaborate in the open discussions for those interested in  DMLMO 
draft<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo>.



Calls are scheduled to start on February 9th

Calls will be hosted every two weeks:

On Wednesday´s starting at 16:00 CET (initially scheduled for 50 min)



Please those who are interested feel free to reach out directly, and I will be 
happy to include you in the outlook invitation



Thanks,

Marisol


Call invitation:
IETF DMLMO review side meeting
Hosted by Marisol Palmero Amador

https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/j.php?MTID=m1618495147d8245ce945e1e61b5a42b1

Wednesday, 9 Feb, 2022 16:00 | 50 minutes | (UTC+01:00) Amsterdam, Berlin, 
Bern, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna
Occurs every 2 week(s) on Wednesday effective 2/9/2022 until 7/27/2022 from 
4:00 PM to 4:50 PM, (UTC+01:00) Brussels, Copenhagen, Madrid, Paris
Meeting number: 2578 169 4611
Password: cwBUWiYb526 (29289492 from phones)

Join by video system
Dial 25781694...@webex.com<mailto:25781694...@webex.com>
You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number.

Join by phone
+34-91-201-2149 Spain Madrid Toll
+34-93-446-6598 Spain Barc

Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Just to inform the WG,
We have hosted a preparation call in order to start the “DMLMO draft” side 
meetings next week:

**IETF DMLMO side meeting kick-off (Feb/2)**

Attendees
* Sudhendu
* Shwetha
* Marisol
* Frank

** DMLMO side meetings are bi-weekly, starting Feb/9 - 7am PST **

* meetings notes will be typed from:
https://notes.ietf.org/ZOfqY-9CSr2SYVeWFfEFsw?both
(to be updated in git repo)

* Preparation slides in google docs:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/143-D3kRFKqqGd2OPUj_kqW7l31TtZjUfVeMYkdzbv7U/edit?usp=sharing


Initial list of topics to review & discuss:

* "Organizations" in YANG
* Licenses linked to Features vs Assets/ License “Catalog”
* LifeCycle for (V)NF vs existing YANG modules
* Inventory, DMLMO doesnt´t have an objective to focus on inventory management, 
but the group is open to collaborate and even consumed from other efforts.
* Round table

Marisol Palmero


From: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" 
Date: Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 16:47
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" , Marisol Palmero 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 

Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

Marisol, while you work to refine this document ahead of any potential WG 
adoption, please bring back any relevant discussions to this list so you have a 
record of interest.  Comments from interested parties will help gauge interest 
should you wish to have opsawg adopt this document.

Thanks.

Joe
On 1/25/22 15:41, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) wrote:
Dear OPSA WG,


We would like to extend this invitation to the OPSA WG to participate and 
collaborate in the open discussions for those interested in  DMLMO 
draft<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo>.



Calls are scheduled to start on February 9th

Calls will be hosted every two weeks:

On Wednesday´s starting at 16:00 CET (initially scheduled for 50 min)



Please those who are interested feel free to reach out directly, and I will be 
happy to include you in the outlook invitation



Thanks,

Marisol


Call invitation:
IETF DMLMO review side meeting
Hosted by Marisol Palmero Amador

https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/j.php?MTID=m1618495147d8245ce945e1e61b5a42b1

Wednesday, 9 Feb, 2022 16:00 | 50 minutes | (UTC+01:00) Amsterdam, Berlin, 
Bern, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna
Occurs every 2 week(s) on Wednesday effective 2/9/2022 until 7/27/2022 from 
4:00 PM to 4:50 PM, (UTC+01:00) Brussels, Copenhagen, Madrid, Paris
Meeting number: 2578 169 4611
Password: cwBUWiYb526 (29289492 from phones)

Join by video system
Dial 25781694...@webex.com<mailto:25781694...@webex.com>
You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number.

Join by phone
+34-91-201-2149 Spain Madrid Toll
+34-93-446-6598 Spain Barcelona Toll

Access code: 257 816 94611




___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Yes Joe.
The intention is to record the session and keep meeting minutes.

Thanks,
Marisol


From: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" 
Date: Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 16:47
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" , Marisol Palmero 
Cc: Sudhendu Kumar , Shwetha Bhandari 

Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

Marisol, while you work to refine this document ahead of any potential WG 
adoption, please bring back any relevant discussions to this list so you have a 
record of interest.  Comments from interested parties will help gauge interest 
should you wish to have opsawg adopt this document.

Thanks.

Joe
On 1/25/22 15:41, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) wrote:
Dear OPSA WG,


We would like to extend this invitation to the OPSA WG to participate and 
collaborate in the open discussions for those interested in  DMLMO 
draft<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo>.



Calls are scheduled to start on February 9th

Calls will be hosted every two weeks:

On Wednesday´s starting at 16:00 CET (initially scheduled for 50 min)



Please those who are interested feel free to reach out directly, and I will be 
happy to include you in the outlook invitation



Thanks,

Marisol


Call invitation:
IETF DMLMO review side meeting
Hosted by Marisol Palmero Amador

https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/j.php?MTID=m1618495147d8245ce945e1e61b5a42b1

Wednesday, 9 Feb, 2022 16:00 | 50 minutes | (UTC+01:00) Amsterdam, Berlin, 
Bern, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna
Occurs every 2 week(s) on Wednesday effective 2/9/2022 until 7/27/2022 from 
4:00 PM to 4:50 PM, (UTC+01:00) Brussels, Copenhagen, Madrid, Paris
Meeting number: 2578 169 4611
Password: cwBUWiYb526 (29289492 from phones)

Join by video system
Dial 25781694...@webex.com<mailto:25781694...@webex.com>
You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number.

Join by phone
+34-91-201-2149 Spain Madrid Toll
+34-93-446-6598 Spain Barcelona Toll

Access code: 257 816 94611




___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

[OPSAWG] IETF DLMO draft side-meeting

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA WG,


We would like to extend this invitation to the OPSA WG to participate and 
collaborate in the open discussions for those interested in  DMLMO 
draft.



Calls are scheduled to start on February 9th

Calls will be hosted every two weeks:

On Wednesday´s starting at 16:00 CET (initially scheduled for 50 min)



Please those who are interested feel free to reach out directly, and I will be 
happy to include you in the outlook invitation



Thanks,

Marisol


Call invitation:
IETF DMLMO review side meeting
Hosted by Marisol Palmero Amador

https://cisco.webex.com/cisco/j.php?MTID=m1618495147d8245ce945e1e61b5a42b1

Wednesday, 9 Feb, 2022 16:00 | 50 minutes | (UTC+01:00) Amsterdam, Berlin, 
Bern, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna
Occurs every 2 week(s) on Wednesday effective 2/9/2022 until 7/27/2022 from 
4:00 PM to 4:50 PM, (UTC+01:00) Brussels, Copenhagen, Madrid, Paris
Meeting number: 2578 169 4611
Password: cwBUWiYb526 (29289492 from phones)

Join by video system
Dial 25781694...@webex.com
You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number.

Join by phone
+34-91-201-2149 Spain Madrid Toll
+34-93-446-6598 Spain Barcelona Toll

Access code: 257 816 94611


___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

[OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-02.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA WG,
 
We've uploaded a new version for the DMLMO draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/ 
 
Main changes tracked under the "change log" section:

version 02

* "Support case" renamed to "incident".
* Add MAC address and IP address attributes under asset-inventory YANG module.
* Link among objects & YANG modules (notably with feature).
* New text about asset usage.

And new author collaboration from Shwetha Bhandari and Carmelo Cardona

We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

 
Many thanks, 
Marisol P.

On 26/10/2021, 01:31, "internet-dra...@ietf.org"  
wrote:


A new version of I-D, draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-02.txt
has been successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:   draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo
Revision:   02
Title:  Data Model for Lifecycle Management and Operations
Document date:  2021-10-26
Group:  Individual Submission
Pages:  53
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-02.txt
Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/
Htmlized:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo
Diff:   
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-02

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

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Many thanks Camilo for your comments,

answering your points.


  1.  You are correct, we will run a new iteration through the young modules 
and add the direct link between license module and feature, as individual 
features within assets can be licensed.
  2.  You are also correct here. It is considered that some attributes will 
need to be feed directly from the vendors, i.e. reading from a catalog. It is 
mentioned in one of the Use cases:
   The Software Conformance use case uses data that might not be
   provided by the asset itself.  Data needs to be provided and
   maintained also by the asset developers, through e.g., asset catalog
   information.  Similar logic applies to a feature catalog, where the
   asset developer maintains the data and updates it adequately based on
   existing bugs, security advisories, etc.

  1.  Point taken, we are also looking to add more concrete example for next 
revisions.

Looking forward to your continued collaboration,

Marisol P



From: Camilo Cardona 
Date: Thursday, 7 October 2021 at 02:08
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" 
Cc: Marisol Palmero 
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for 
draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

Hello opsawg,

I gave a read to draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-01, and discussed it with Marisol 
on a call, but I thought I could share my main remarks here:


1. One of the basic use cases of the draft is to find information about 
features and licenses (e.g. which feature(s) are enabled by a license, which 
license(s) I need for a feature, etc). However, I cannot find a way of 
“linking” licenses to features in the model. The model does link licenses to 
assets, but I think there is a need for a direct relation between license and 
features.


2. In the text, there is a bit of ambiguity of what the yang model covers, and 
what should be provided by vendors. In the use cases from 4.3 to 4.6, you need 
the most recent data from vendors to run the analysis that each point 
describes. Are we going to structure that data too? It seems this is out of the 
scope of the draft, and that is fine... but I did wonder that when I was 
reading since I was expecting that data to appear later in the models.


3. As always in drafts with yang models, we are missing some concrete examples.

Besides that, the purpose of the draft is clear to me, and I wish it were this 
easy to retrieve this data in a standard way.

Thanks,
Camilo C


On 6 Oct 2021, at 19:00, Juan Camilo Cardona Restrepo 
mailto:jccardon...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Dear OPSA WG,



We've just posted a new draft that introduces a data model for lifecycle 
management and operations:

https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt





We don't yet have data models that deal with data concerning adoption and 
usability, licensing, supported features and capabilities, enabled features and 
capabilities, etc. of a hardware or software, physical or virtual component.

We hope that the new draft can help fill this gap.



We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.



Many thanks,

Marisol





Marisol Palmero

CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEAR | Cisco Customer Experience CTO | P: 
+34.91.201.2643 | M: +34.629.634.595







On 23/08/2021, 22:04, 
"internet-dra...@ietf.org" 
;> wrote:





A new version of I-D, draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

has been successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the

IETF repository.



Name:draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo

Revision:00

Title:   Data Model for Lifecycle Management and Operations

Document date:   2021-08-23

Group:   Individual Submission

Pages:   48

URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/

Htmlized:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo





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

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Many thanks Shwetha for getting back on the draft.

To answer your points:

  1.  Yes! Software application, hosted in cloud, also responses to a form of 
Asset as part of the draft.
  2.  It will be good  to hear more on your proposal, lifecycle in SaaS is part 
of our scope.
  3.  Yes, we are open to discussions around extending such use case for  
future revisions.

If you are fine, Ill set up a call to follow up on your email below

Many thanks,
Marisol


Marisol Palmero
CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEAR | Cisco Customer Experience CTO | P: 
+34.91.201.2643 | M: +34.629.634.595



From: Shwetha Bhandari 
Date: Wednesday, 22 September 2021 at 09:42
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" , Marisol Palmero 
Cc: "skuma...@ncsu.edu" 
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for 
draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt


Hi Marisol,

I have read the draft draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00 and have the following 
questions/suggestions on the scope and use cases:

1. Does the scope include lifecycle management and operations for an 
application that can be managed by the application vendor i.e. Software as a 
Service(SaaS) application? In other words can the asset referred to in the 
document be a cloud hosted software asset? If yes, that's great! I think there 
is no standard to collect metrics that will help in asset management and 
billing in the SaaS space and this work would be interesting to SaaS 
applications.


2. Related to this an interesting use case that would be added to the document 
is to support Billing based on the usage and consumption of the SaaS 
application. To support this use-case for software/SaaS application assets can 
the metric collection be made extensible to cover application specific metrics? 
for e.g. A data analytics application may be interested in metrics related to 
amount of data analyzed, number of requests triggered for analysis, concurrent 
user sessions that trigger the request etc. These metrics could be used for 
billing the consumers of the SaaS application.


3. Would you be interested in contributions if the above use cases and asset 
type can be supported to extend the information model?


Thanks,
Shwetha





On 8/24/2021 11:29 AM, Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero) wrote:

> Dear OPSA WG,

>

> We've just posted a new draft that introduces a data model for lifecycle 
> management and operations:

> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

>

>

> We don't yet have data models that deal with data concerning adoption and 
> usability, licensing, supported features and capabilities, enabled features 
> and capabilities, etc. of a hardware or software, physical or virtual 
> component.

> We hope that the new draft can help fill this gap.

>

> We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.

>

> Many thanks,

> Marisol

>

>

> Marisol Palmero

> CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEAR | Cisco Customer Experience CTO | P: 
> +34.91.201.2643 | M: +34.629.634.595

>

>

>

> On 23/08/2021, 22:04, 
> "internet-dra...@ietf.org"<mailto:"internet-dra...@ietf.org";> 
> <mailto:<internet-dra...@ietf.org>;> wrote:

>

>

>  A new version of I-D, draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

>  has been successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the

>  IETF repository.

>

>  Name:  draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo

>  Revision: 00

>  Title: Data Model for Lifecycle Management and Operations

>  Document date: 2021-08-23

>  Group: Individual Submission

>  Pages: 48

>  URL:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

>  Status: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/

>  Htmlized:   
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo

>

>

>  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<mailto:OPSAWG@ietf.org>

> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt

[Marisol Palmero Amador (mpalmero)]

Dear OPSA WG,
 
We've just posted a new draft that introduces a data model for lifecycle 
management and operations:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt


We don't yet have data models that deal with data concerning adoption and 
usability, licensing, supported features and capabilities, enabled features and 
capabilities, etc. of a hardware or software, physical or virtual component. 
We hope that the new draft can help fill this gap.
 
We greatly appreciate your thoughts and comments.
 
Many thanks, 
Marisol


Marisol Palmero
CCIE #5122 | Technical Leader EMEAR | Cisco Customer Experience CTO | P: 
+34.91.201.2643 | M: +34.629.634.595 
 
 

On 23/08/2021, 22:04, "internet-dra...@ietf.org"  
wrote:


A new version of I-D, draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Marisol Palmero and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:   draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo
Revision:   00
Title:  Data Model for Lifecycle Management and Operations
Document date:  2021-08-23
Group:  Individual Submission
Pages:  48
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo-00.txt
Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo/
Htmlized:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-palmero-opsawg-dmlmo


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