perfsonar development work

["Matthias K. Hamm" <>]

Hi maxim,

as far as I remember, the next meeting was scheduled to be at 20. of 
July in Utrecht - but I could be wrong. Also I have no idea about the 
agenda ...

Cheers,

M&M

maxim schrieb:
> Thanks for your reply, Matthias,
> When the next LHC OPN meeting is going to happen ( I could not find info
> about it
> on the LHCOPN wiki) ?
>   Cheers,
>        Maxim. 
>
>   
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Matthias K. Hamm [mailto:] 
> > Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 4:33 AM
> > To: maxim
> > Cc: ; 'Mark Yampolskiy'; 
> > ; 'Lhc-Mon-Deployment@Dante. Org. Uk'
> > Subject: Re: [pS-dev] Integration of E2Emon MP in next 
> > perfSONAR release
> >
> > Hi Maxim,
> >
> > please excuse the late reply, I have lost your mail somewhere 
> > in my folders...
> >
> > maxim schrieb:
> >     
> > > What is the difference between ENOC and E2ECU ?I thought the title 
> > > E2ECU supposed to mean that it monitors status of the 
> > >       
> > End-to-end links 
> >     
> > > and in case of monitoring limited only  by layer 2 there is 
> > >       
> > no way to 
> >     
> > > say that end-to-end path up or down for sure. And with 
> > >       
> > LHCOPN cuircits 
> >     
> > > its very important to be sure if the whole link is up or 
> > >       
> > having some 
> >     
> > > kind of problems.
> > >   
> > >       
> > The Geant2 E2ECU concentrates on L2 because the service 
> > Geant2 provides is L2-connectivity which users can build an 
> > own OPN upon.
> > The E2Emon system was designed for supporting the needs of the E2ECU.
> >
> > But I fully agree with you. We definitely need monitoring 
> > systems that can combine L2 and L3 metrics to cover real 
> > end-to-end measurements (because incidents don't care about 
> > organisational boundaries ;-) ) This means not nececarily 
> > need adding metrics to a monitoring system - it could also 
> > mean to combine existing systems (e.g. in perfSONAR we have 
> > quite a bunch).
> >
> > In the last Geant2 Technical Workshop we talked a lot about 
> > combining monitoring systems to enable the things you pointed out.
> >
> > Perhaps we could talk in the next LHC OPN meeting in Utrecht 
> > (together with the perfSONAR people and others interested in 
> > monitoring issues), exchange ideas and perhaps think about a roadmap ?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > M&M
> >
> >
> >     
> > > --Maxim
> > >
> > >   
> > >       
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Matthias K. Hamm 
> > > > [mailto:]
> > > > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 8:49 AM
> > > > To: maxim
> > > > Cc: 
> > > > ;
> > > >  'Mark Yampolskiy'; 'Phil DeMar'
> > > > Subject: Re: [pS-dev] Integration of E2Emon MP in next perfSONAR 
> > > > release
> > > >
> > > > Hi maxim,
> > > >
> > > > we agree that proper monitoring strategie always has to rely on 
> > > > different monitoring techniques.
> > > >
> > > > IMHO it makes no sense to put it all in one service. In 
> > > >         
> > our case, the 
> >     
> > > > ENOC may be interested in layer 3 measurements - the E2ECU is not.
> > > >
> > > > As perfSONAR is a service-oriented multi-domain monitoring 
> > > > architecture, it should be aimed to combine the measurements of 
> > > > multiple services (L2, L3, pingER ...) to get a "holistic"
> > > > view - e.g. in CNM or other visualization tools.
> > > >
> > > > That should be adressed in the perfSONAR community, as it 
> > > >         
> > is a more 
> >     
> > > > general issue and covers not only E2Emon.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > M&M
> > > >
> > > > maxim schrieb:
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > We've had a  discussion recently with Joe Metzger about how E2E 
> > > > > monitoring system is treating the status response from 
> > > > >           
> > intermediate 
> >     
> > > > > MPs and from the endpoint MP.
> > > > > Currently they treated the same way and it makes the whole
> > > > >       
> > > > >           
> > > > monitoring
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > is kind of limited, since endpoint of the link has much bigger 
> > > > > capabilities in monitoring. For example the virtual circuit
> > > > >       
> > > > >           
> > > > from CERN
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > to FNAL could be down due BGP problems or any other routing
> > > > >       
> > > > >           
> > > > issues but
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > the layer 2 status will be up on every sub-link. Have you
> > > > >       
> > > > >           
> > > > though about
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > adding another E2E Layer3 MP into the LHCOPN monitoring
> > > > >       
> > > > >           
> > > > framework or
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > any other monitoring system or adding Layer 3 monitoring
> > > > >       
> > > > >           
> > > > capabilities
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > into the current E2Emon MP?
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >          Maxim.
> > > > >
> > > > >   
> > > > >       
> > > > >           
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Matthias K. Hamm 
> > > > > > [mailto:]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 7:06 AM
> > > > > > To: Loukik Kudarimoti
> > > > > > Cc: 
> > > > > > ;
> > > > > >  Mark Yampolskiy
> > > > > > Subject: [pS-dev] Integration of E2Emon MP in next
> > > > > >         
> > > > > >             
> > > > perfSONAR release
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > > Hi Loukik,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > we seriously reworked our E2Emon MP to handle
> > > > > >         
> > > > > >             
> > > > document/literal SOAP
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > > calls. We would like you to initiate the retesting in 
> > > > > >             
> > order to get 
> >     
> > > > > > the MP included in - hoepfully
> > > > > > - the very next perfSONAR release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Before going into integration tests done by the testing
> > > > > >         
> > > > > >             
> > > > team, could
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > > > > you please give us more information about the testing 
> > > > > >             
> > environment 
> >     
> > > > > > (which
> > > > > > client(s) you test with, which request etc.)? We then do 
> > > > > >             
> > some more 
> >     
> > > > > > internal tests and hand you over a new RC then.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > See you soon in Cambridge,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > M&M
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Matthias Hamm
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > Leibniz-Rechenzentrum / Leibniz Computing Centre Raum I.2.107 
> > > > > > Boltzmannstrasse 1, 85748 Garching, Germany
> > > > > > Telefon: +49 89 35831-8832
> > > > > > Fax:     +49 89 35831-9700
> > > > > > E-Mail:  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     
> > > > > >         
> > > > > >             
> > > > >   
> > > > >       
> > > > >           
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Matthias Hamm
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > > Leibniz-Rechenzentrum / Leibniz Computing Centre Raum I.2.107 
> > > > Boltzmannstrasse 1, 85748 Garching, Germany
> > > > Telefon: +49 89 35831-8832
> > > > Fax:     +49 89 35831-9700
> > > > E-Mail:  
> > > >
> > > > -------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > >   
> > >       
> > --
> >
> > Matthias Hamm
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------
> > Leibniz-Rechenzentrum / Leibniz Computing Centre Raum I.2.107 
> > Boltzmannstrasse 1, 85748 Garching, Germany
> > Telefon: +49 89 35831-8832
> > Fax:     +49 89 35831-9700
> > E-Mail:  
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >     
>
>
>   


--

Matthias Hamm

------------------------------------------------
Leibniz-Rechenzentrum / Leibniz Computing Centre
Raum I.2.107
Boltzmannstrasse 1, 85748 Garching, Germany
Telefon: +49 89 35831-8832
Fax:     +49 89 35831-9700
E-Mail:  

-------------------------------------------------