All, I have only a short list of "registered" participants right now. I do not see enough IETF OPS-NM folk, and I do not see enough European (or better non-USA) operators. I understand and respect that the events of last week may have made you wait to register. However, if we do not get a longer list of participants, then one should wonder if it makes sense to have this meeting at all. If it is caused by last weeks events, then we can consider to move it out to the next RIPE meeting which I believe is in January in Amsterdam. But I wonder if this is really the reason, specifically for the European operators, and after all, we want to speak with these European operators. I think we all seriously hope that things will calm down over the next 2 weeks, and that in October we can more or less assume we can travel again. If that turns out to be false hope, we can cancel the meeting at the last minute. But assuming everything gets better from now on, pls let me know if you plan to attend (see below). To do so,please send me (bwijnen@lucent.com) a short email to let us know. Pls add a few lines as to why you want to participate. Bert details about the meeting times, venue, agenda, see below -----Original Message----- From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com] Sent: maandag 3 september 2001 20:31 To: ops-area@ops.ietf.org Subject: OPS-NM Interim meeting (Oct 1-2) All, At the last two IETF OPS Area Open meetings, we had some good discussion between the OPS NM folk and some operators. We also have had a so called OPS-NM Interim in the USA that was co-located with NANOG in May of this year. We also called it something like: Net Management Protocol Folk & Net Operators - Reality Check #2 We will have another IETF Interim Meeting for the OPS-AREA Network Management people, this time in Europe, co-located with the next RIPE-NCC meeting. The idea is to meet with another set of operators to try and understand their needs and to explain to them how we think that our NM related work in the IETF can help them to manage their networks. In other words: Net Management Protocol Folk & Net Operators - Reality Check #3 We probably will have similar sessions in the future to meet with people who operate enterprise networks, because their requirements may be different. We are still working on the agenda, however below you will find a prelimenary agenda proposal. Any suggestions should be sent to Randy (randy@psg.com) and Bert (bwijnen@lucent.com) We have limited space for this meeting. Those who plan to attend, pls send a short email to Bert Wijnen <bwijnen@lucent.com> to let us know. Pls add a few lines as to why you want to participate. Bert and Randy -------------- OPS-NM Interim Meeting details ------------------ The plan is to have this meeting co-located with the next RIPE NCC meeting, namely RIPE 40. That means: Oct 1st OPS-NM Interim from 2-5pm Oct 2nd OPS-NM Interim from 9am-noon Oct 2-5 RIPE 40. Starts at 1:30pm on oct 2nd. RIPE 40 and OPS-NM Interim will be in the Prague Congress Centre in Prague, Czech Republic. For RIPE 40 and hotel registration, pls visit: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/current/ripe-40/ There is a whole range of hotels to choose from, but it is very hard to book, so do it now. Those only participating in the OPS-NM meeting are not required to pay the RIPE meeting fee. Of course, if you want to take the opportunity to participate in the RIPE-NCC meeting, then you should register for that meeting via the web page listed above. Those who plan to attend the OPS-NM Interim should send an email to Bert Wijnen <bwijnen@lucent.com> because we only have limited room, and if too many people want to show up we may have to tell some that there is no more space. Prelimenary Agenda ------------------ - Agenda bashing and intro - Summary of the current set of OPS requirements draft-ops-operator-req-mgmt-00.txt Please read this document to prepare for the meeting. If this one no longer exists, then pls check for a possible revision 01.txt. It is important to try and figure out if this also represents needs of European operators, or do they have different/new/additional requirements? - Discussion of the above. - Discussion of SNMP, MIBs, COPS, POLICY and such - how do the developers of these protocols/specs think that they can address operator NM requirments. - what do operators think about that - what kind of positive or negative expoerience do operators have - Operator requirements - what are the real hot issues to be solved this year - what are the constraints within which the tools have to work - Next steps - Wrapup/Summary -30-