Re: [OPSAWG] Network Incident Management Side Meeting Summary

2024-01-30 Thread Qin Wu
v-04 is posted 
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management/), the 
main changes focuses on addressing comments raised in last IETF meeting and 
side meeting and include:

· Update incident definition based on TMF incident API profile 
specification.¶<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management#appendix-A-3.1.1>

· Update use case on Multi-layer Fault Demarcation based on side 
meeting discussion and IETF 119 session 
discussion.¶<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management#appendix-A-3.2.1>

· Update section 5.1 to explain how network incident is generated based 
on other 
factors.¶<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management#appendix-A-3.3.1>

· Add one new use cases on Security Events noise reduction based on 
Situation 
Awareness.¶<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management#appendix-A-3.4.1>

-Qin
发件人: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Qin Wu
发送时间: 2023年11月10日 15:46
收件人: opsawg@ietf.org
抄送: draft-opsawg-evans-discardmo...@ietf.org; 
draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-semant...@ietf.org; 
draft-feng-opsawg-incident-managem...@ietf.org
主题: [OPSAWG] Network Incident Management Side Meeting Summary


Hi, All:

Thanks all folks who participated in network incident management discussion on 
Tuesday afternoon. The side meeting was spent one hour exploring network 
incident concepts and use cases; three related drafts were discussed. We 
received a lot of great contributions for the following drafts being discussed:



https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management/ 
(Service Level Incident)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-evans-discardmodel/ (Anomaly 
Detection, Correlation and Mitigation for Packet Discard)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-semantics/
 (Network anomaly semantics)



It was identified that multi-layer Fault Demarcation is related to POI, however 
the network incident model can be defined as generic model used for many other 
use cases.



A few issues were raised in the meeting:



1. Network Incident definitions needs more clarity even though it origins from 
TMF specification, e.g., how it is related to symptom, anomaly, etc.

2. Besides SLO violation, how network incident is generated based on other 
factors, more usage examples are needed for these.

3. Incident terminology is well-defined and should be consistent across the 
drafts and, where possible, synced with other SDO meanings (although the 
language may vary)



Follow up actions include:



1. Nigel and Adrian volunteered to help define key terminology uses and define 
terms;

2. Dan to check with MEF and TMF documentation to check for SLO handling, 
including incident and problem coordination and definitions;

3. Open the network incident draft GitHub to the public and use it for draft 
development and tracking issues.



-Qin (on behalf of Team)

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


Re: [OPSAWG] Network Incident Management Side Meeting Summary

2023-12-20 Thread Qin Wu
Thanks Adrian for the update, look forward to reviewing the version and happy 
to set up a meeting when it is ready.

-Qin
发件人: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk]
发送时间: 2023年12月13日 0:54
收件人: Qin Wu ; opsawg@ietf.org
抄送: draft-opsawg-evans-discardmo...@ietf.org; 
draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-semant...@ietf.org; 
draft-feng-opsawg-incident-managem...@ietf.org; ne...@ietf.org
主题: RE: [OPSAWG] Network Incident Management Side Meeting Summary

[Adding the NMOP list �C which is currently called NETMO]

It’s a month later.

Nigel and I have been working on the first version of key terminology. We’ve 
actually made some progress (perhaps slower than our initial enthusiasm might 
have suggested).

We’re just putting the last polish on our first version that we intent to share 
“soon.”

Cheers,
Adrian

From: OPSAWG mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org>> On 
Behalf Of Qin Wu
Sent: 10 November 2023 07:46
To: opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Cc: 
draft-opsawg-evans-discardmo...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-opsawg-evans-discardmo...@ietf.org>;
 
draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-semant...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-semant...@ietf.org>;
 
draft-feng-opsawg-incident-managem...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-feng-opsawg-incident-managem...@ietf.org>
Subject: [OPSAWG] Network Incident Management Side Meeting Summary


Hi, All:

Thanks all folks who participated in network incident management discussion on 
Tuesday afternoon. The side meeting was spent one hour exploring network 
incident concepts and use cases; three related drafts were discussed. We 
received a lot of great contributions for the following drafts being discussed:



https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management/ 
(Service Level Incident)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-evans-discardmodel/ (Anomaly 
Detection, Correlation and Mitigation for Packet Discard)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-semantics/
 (Network anomaly semantics)



It was identified that multi-layer Fault Demarcation is related to POI, however 
the network incident model can be defined as generic model used for many other 
use cases.



A few issues were raised in the meeting:



1. Network Incident definitions needs more clarity even though it origins from 
TMF specification, e.g., how it is related to symptom, anomaly, etc.

2. Besides SLO violation, how network incident is generated based on other 
factors, more usage examples are needed for these.

3. Incident terminology is well-defined and should be consistent across the 
drafts and, where possible, synced with other SDO meanings (although the 
language may vary)



Follow up actions include:



1. Nigel and Adrian volunteered to help define key terminology uses and define 
terms;

2. Dan to check with MEF and TMF documentation to check for SLO handling, 
including incident and problem coordination and definitions;

3. Open the network incident draft GitHub to the public and use it for draft 
development and tracking issues.



-Qin (on behalf of Team)

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


Re: [OPSAWG] Network Incident Management Side Meeting Summary

2023-12-12 Thread Adrian Farrel
[Adding the NMOP list - which is currently called NETMO]

 

It's a month later. 

 

Nigel and I have been working on the first version of key terminology. We've
actually made some progress (perhaps slower than our initial enthusiasm
might have suggested).

 

We're just putting the last polish on our first version that we intent to
share "soon."

 

Cheers,

Adrian

 

From: OPSAWG  On Behalf Of Qin Wu
Sent: 10 November 2023 07:46
To: opsawg@ietf.org
Cc: draft-opsawg-evans-discardmo...@ietf.org;
draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-semant...@ietf.org;
draft-feng-opsawg-incident-managem...@ietf.org
Subject: [OPSAWG] Network Incident Management Side Meeting Summary

 

Hi, All:

Thanks all folks who participated in network incident management discussion
on Tuesday afternoon. The side meeting was spent one hour exploring network
incident concepts and use cases; three related drafts were discussed. We
received a lot of great contributions for the following drafts being
discussed:

 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management/
(Service Level Incident)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-evans-discardmodel/ (Anomaly
Detection, Correlation and Mitigation for Packet Discard) 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-se
mantics/ (Network anomaly semantics)

 

It was identified that multi-layer Fault Demarcation is related to POI,
however the network incident model can be defined as generic model used for
many other use cases.

 

A few issues were raised in the meeting:

 

1. Network Incident definitions needs more clarity even though it origins
from TMF specification, e.g., how it is related to symptom, anomaly, etc.

2. Besides SLO violation, how network incident is generated based on other
factors, more usage examples are needed for these.

3. Incident terminology is well-defined and should be consistent across the
drafts and, where possible, synced with other SDO meanings (although the
language may vary)

 

Follow up actions include:

 

1. Nigel and Adrian volunteered to help define key terminology uses and
define terms; 

2. Dan to check with MEF and TMF documentation to check for SLO handling,
including incident and problem coordination and definitions; 

3. Open the network incident draft GitHub to the public and use it for draft
development and tracking issues.

 

-Qin (on behalf of Team)

 

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


[OPSAWG] Network Incident Management Side Meeting Summary

2023-11-09 Thread Qin Wu
Hi, All:

Thanks all folks who participated in network incident management discussion on 
Tuesday afternoon. The side meeting was spent one hour exploring network 
incident concepts and use cases; three related drafts were discussed. We 
received a lot of great contributions for the following drafts being discussed:



https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-feng-opsawg-incident-management/ 
(Service Level Incident)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-evans-discardmodel/ (Anomaly 
Detection, Correlation and Mitigation for Packet Discard)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-netana-opsawg-nmrg-network-anomaly-semantics/
 (Network anomaly semantics)



It was identified that multi-layer Fault Demarcation is related to POI, however 
the network incident model can be defined as generic model used for many other 
use cases.



A few issues were raised in the meeting:



1. Network Incident definitions needs more clarity even though it origins from 
TMF specification, e.g., how it is related to symptom, anomaly, etc.

2. Besides SLO violation, how network incident is generated based on other 
factors, more usage examples are needed for these.

3. Incident terminology is well-defined and should be consistent across the 
drafts and, where possible, synced with other SDO meanings (although the 
language may vary)



Follow up actions include:



1. Nigel and Adrian volunteered to help define key terminology uses and define 
terms;

2. Dan to check with MEF and TMF documentation to check for SLO handling, 
including incident and problem coordination and definitions;

3. Open the network incident draft GitHub to the public and use it for draft 
development and tracking issues.



-Qin (on behalf of Team)

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