[Nmc-wg] Multilayer E2Emon

[Jason Zurawski]

Hi Michael;

On 10/25/10 1:22 PM, Michael Bischoff wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> As I might actually make it there(28th), I might as well chime in.
>
> Afaik the following topics have recently been discussed and I would
> expect them to be on the agenda:
>
> - Wrapping up(hopefully) result codes
> - How to advertise capabilities (From last call)
> - Overall progress
>
> Others would be:
>
> - how to deal with multilayer E2E monitoring
> - Streaming? there was quite some interest in this before everyone
> went on vacation, not sure if it's a priority atm. (I expected more
> momentum within nmc)


If you are able to make it, and if you have some work you would like to 
present I am sure we could devote 10-15 minutes in the second session. 
Since attendance may be low for our session it may make more sense to 
continue the discussion on the mailing list.

-jason


> - Others?
>
> With regards to multilayer E2E monitoring I'll leave that to the
> experts. As I recall as we asserted that the whole thing was quite
> non-trivial and full of pitfalls, I though the consensus was to
> incorporate/reuse an other spec. What do you want to nail down, sort
> out at OGF specifically Freek?
>
> Kind regards,
> Michael
>
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 3:27 AM, Freek Dijkstra<Freek.Dijkstra at sara.nl>  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Would there be time at the OGF upcoming week to discuss how to deal with
>> multilayer E2E monitoring?
>>
>> Basically, we have been trying to implement something like that, but got
>> stuck, since the current XML was not going to work no matter how we bend
>> it. Peter Tavenier (a colleague of mine) and I asked for opinions on the
>> perfsonar-dev list, explaining our rational for doing this.
>>
>> See:
>> https://lists.internet2.edu/sympa/arc/perfsonar-dev/2010-09/msg00010.html and
>> more mails in that thread.
>>
>> Frankly, the discussion that followed in our group at SARA reminded me a
>> bit on discussion we had on the NML list 3 years ago, and I'm not sure I
>> want to repeat that. Also I prefer to have a slightly faster time
>> progressing time. :~)
>>
>> So I was hoping to get some feedback how to proceed and if other share
>> this interest.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Freek