Changes between Version 51 and Version 52 of Gec7InstMeasWGAgenda

Timestamp:

03/25/10 15:25:31 (14 years ago)

Author:

hmussman@bbn.com

Comment:

--

Gec7InstMeasWGAgenda

@@ -443 +443 @@
 5:10pm  Bruce Maggs (Duke University) [[BR]]
 
-I&M WG process:
-+  It was agreed that there should be more I&M WG engineering meetings, where members meet, present proposed solutions, and then review them.
-+  How the WG actually reaches a consensus is still TBD,
-
-Topics discussed were:
-+  MD schema
-+  I&M services
-+  I&M use cases
-
-Topics not discussed were:
-+  Measurement plane definition
-
-MD schema:
-+  First, we need to get it down.
-+  Then, expect it to need to be wrong, and thus needs to be modified or additions.
-+  Note:  Not always IP-based netwwokr data
-+  Those who agreed to work on this topic:  
--  OMF/OML, Max Ott;  in favor of almost null schema
--  LAMP/perf SONAR, Univ Delaware
--  DatCat, Brad Huffaker
--  S3, Purdue and HP Labs
--  CNRI, Larry Lannom
--  Brian Hay, Univ Alaska/Fairbanks
-
-I&M services:
-+  Propose set (MP, MC, MAP, MDA and MO) may be a sufficiently good set.
-+  How to come to a consensus?
-+  Those who agreed to work on this topic:  
--  INSTOOLS, Univ Kentucky, Jim Griffioen
--  OMF/OML, Max Ott
--  LAMP/perf SONAR, Univ Delaware
--  S3, Purdue and HP Labs
--  OnTime MEasure, Ohio Supercomputing Center
--  Brian Hay, Univ Alaska/Fairbanks 
+I&M WG process:[[BR]]
++  It was agreed that there should be more I&M WG engineering meetings, where members meet, present proposed solutions, and then review them.[[BR]]
++  How the WG actually reaches a consensus is still TBD.  [[BR]]
+
+Topics discussed among WG were:[[BR]]
++  MD schema[[BR]]
++  I&M services[[BR]]
++  I&M use cases[[BR]]
+
+Topics not discussed among WG were:[[BR]]
++  Measurement plane definition[[BR]]
+
+MD schema: [[BR]]
++  First, we need to get it down. [[BR]]
++  Then, expect it to need to be wrong, and thus needs to be modified or additions. [[BR]]
++  Note:  Not always IP-based network data [[BR]]
++  Those who agreed to work on this topic:   [[BR]]
+-  OMF/OML, NICTA, Max Ott;  in favor of an almost null schema [[BR]]
+-  LAMP/perf SONAR, Univ Delaware, (Martin Swany), Guilherme Fernandes, Ezra Kissel [[BR]]
+-  DatCat, Brad Huffaker [[BR]]
+-  S3, Purdue, (Sonia Fahmy), Sriharsha Gangam, and HP Labs, Puneet Sharma [[BR]]
+-  CNRI, Larry Lannom, (Giridhar Manepalli) [[BR]]
+-  Brian Hay, Univ Alaska/Fairbanks [[BR]]
+-  others? [[BR]]
+
+I&M services: [[BR]]
++  Propose set (MP, MC, MAP, MDA and MO) may be a sufficiently good set. [[BR]]
++  How to come to a consensus? [[BR]]
++  Those who agreed to work on this topic:  [[BR]] 
+-  INSTOOLS, Univ Kentucky, Jim Griffioen, Hussamuddin Nasir [[BR]]
+-  OMF/OML, NICTA, Max Ott [[BR]]
+-  LAMP/perf SONAR, Univ Delaware, (Martin Swany), Guilherme Fernandes, Ezra Kissel [[BR]]
+-  S3, Purdue, (Sonia Fahmy), Sriharsha Gangam, and HP Labs, Puneet Sharma [[BR]]
+-  OnTime Measure, Ohio Supercomputing Center, Prasad Calyam, Weiphing Mandawa [[BR]]
+-  Brian Hay, Univ Alaska/Fairbanks  [[BR]]
+-  others? [[BR]]
 
 I&M Use Cases:
-+  FAgreed that we need this soon!
-+  SHould check 2009 workshop attendees.
-+  Those who agreed to work on this topic:  
--  CNRI, Larry Lannom
-+  Those who are requested to work on this topic:
--  INSTOOLS, Univ Kentucky, Jim Griffioen
--  OMF/OML, Max Ott
--  LAMP/perf SONAR, Univ Delaware
--  S3, Purdue and HP Labs
--  others?
++  We agreed that we need this soon! [[BR]]
++  SHould check 2009 workshop attendees. [[BR]]
++  Those who agreed to work on this topic:   [[BR]]
+-  CNRI, Larry Lannom, (Giridhar Manepalli) [[BR]]
++  Those who are requested to work on this topic: [[BR]]
+-  INSTOOLS, Univ Kentucky, Jim Griffioen, Hussamuddin Nasir [[BR]]
+-  OMF/OML, NICTA, Max Ott [[BR]]
+-  LAMP/perf SONAR, Univ Delaware, (Martin Swany), Guilherme Fernandes, Ezra Kissel [[BR]]
+-  S3, Purdue, (Sonia Fahmy), Sriharsha Gangam, and HP Labs, Puneet Sharma [[BR]]
+-  others? [[BR]]