Subject: [nmrg] Minutes | NMRG | IETF 112

From: "Ciavaglia, Laurent" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 14:16:59 +0000

Hello NMRG,

Minutes of the NMRG session at IETF 112 meeting are available:

  *   Datatracker: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/minutes-112-nmrg-00
  *   Hedgedoc: https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-112-nmrg#
  *   And copied below for your convenience
Please check the minutes and report mistakes, missing information, etc. to the RG chairs. Thank you.

The session recording is available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnT86yKxPDU

Best regards, Jérôme & Laurent
***

NMRG 64th meeting
IETF 112, Online

Monday, November 08, 2021, 12:00-14:00 (UTC)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/session/29157.ics

________________________________

Contacts:
RG Chairs
* Laurent Ciavaglia [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
* Jéröme François [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
RG Secretaries
* Jéferson Campos Nobre [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
* Pedro Martinez-Julia [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>

________________________________

Useful links:
Materials: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/session/nmrg
Meetecho: https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/ietf112/?group=nmrg&short=&item=1
Notes: https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-112-nmrg
Video recording: https://www.youtube.com/user/ietf/playlists

________________________________

Agenda:

12:00 - 12:15 Introduction and RG status, RG Chairs, 15 min.

  *   IBN draft status (20 min)

12:15 - 12:25 Network Measurement Intent, Kehan Yao, 5min + 5min Q&A
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yang-nmrg-network-measurement-intent/

12:25 - 12:35 Interconnection Intents, Luis Contreras, 5min + 5min Q&A
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-contreras-nmrg-interconnection-intents/

  *   Digital twins (60 min)

12:35 - 13:00 Digital Twins for Industrial IoT Networking, Chiara Grasselli, 20min + 5min Q&A

13:00 - 13:15 An Efficient Data collection method for Digital Twin Network, Yanhong Zhu, 10min + 5min Q&A
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhu-nmrg-digitaltwin-data-collection/

13:15 - 13:35 Digital Twin Network: Concepts and Reference Architecture, Cheng Zhou, 10min + 10min Q&A
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhou-nmrg-digitaltwin-network-concepts/

  *   Other topic (15 min)

13:35 - 13:50 Artificial Intelligence Framework for Network Management, Pedro Martinez-Julia, 10 min + 5min Q&A
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-pedro-nmrg-ai-framework-00.txt

  *   AOB

________________________________

Notes:

12:00 - 12:15 Introduction and RG status, RG Chairs, 15 min.

  *   IBN RG documents:
     *   new versions addressing IRTF Chair comments under preparation
     *   calls to be planned between document shepherds, authors and IRTF chair

  *   IBN draft status (20 min)

12:15 - 12:25 Network Measurement Intent, Kehan Yao, 5min + 5min Q&A
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yang-nmrg-network-measurement-intent/

  *   Authors ask for adoption as RG document.
  *   Laurent: no formal procedure call for adoption but a usual procedure in NMRG. We have several use cases provided in the RG. Indepedent use cases documents and/or joint document -> up to the authors and the group to decide
  *   Kehan: people interested in contributing with other use cases can reach me by email or we can organize other meetings
  *   Laurent: also refer to classification draft for organizing the use cases
  *   Charles E.: This document from MEF may be of interest to the authors https://www.mef.net/resources/mef-1…rvice-readiness-testing-for-sd-wan/<https://www.mef.net/resources/mef-1%E2%80%A6rvice-readiness-testing-for-sd-wan/>
  *   Robert W. : It might be helpful if this document was added to the references section https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ntf/
  *   Benoit C.: And another related draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/dr…awg-service-assurance-architecture/<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/dr%E2%80%A6awg-service-assurance-architecture/>, which will need the measurement aspects.
  *   Laurent: On IBN use case drafts : I’d like to invite for a dedicated “interim” meeting with interested participants. Discuss the use cases themselves and what outcome we expect to deliver: can be documents, code, tools… I’m thinking about potential PoC development and why not IETF Hackathon projects ;)

12:25 - 12:35 Interconnection Intents, Luis Contreras, 5min + 5min Q&A
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-contreras-nmrg-interconnection-intents/

  *   Laurent: what primary network environment do you see for this application…? like IXCs? between verticals and network/service providers
  *   Luis: yes. firstly, IXC. may be extensible when work matures.
  *   Laurent: reference to paper on IXC automation: HolistIX: a zero-touch approach for IXPs, Christoff Visser (IIJ Innovation Institute, Japan); Marc Bruyere (IIJ Innovation Institute & The University of Tokyo, Japan); Yuji Sekiya and Seiichi Yamamoto (The University of Tokyo, Japan); Takashi Tomine (National Institute of Information and Communications Technology, Japan) - ZNSM

  *   Digital twins (60 min)

12:35 - 13:00 Digital Twins for Industrial IoT Networking, Chiara Grasselli, 20min + 5min Q&A

  *   Laurent: you setup different virtual environnement. How you link them to the digital twin environment? How to interface with the real network?
  *   Chiara: interfaces developed by other partners like Lorawan, CanOpen
  *   Laurent: other scenarios you simulate on the DT?
  *   Chiara: other attack scenarios planned

13:00 - 13:15 An Efficient Data collection method for Digital Twin Network, Yanhong Zhu, 10min + 5min Q&A
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhu-nmrg-digitaltwin-data-collection/

  *   Laurent: not a single approach to adequate data collection from real network, more a range of methods to suit different needs. Ideas on methods to adapt, anticipate on data collection needs to address the requirements of various digitial twin simulation e.g. more or less detailed monitoring information, new metrics, etc. and evaulation of such methods for cost / performance ratio. Don’t go too much away from the “twin” - excat copy of the real network
  *   Cheng: next version will clarify the scope of the draft
  *   Mohamed: I don’t think there is an answer for the first question raised by Laurent as this depends on the application making using of the digital twin. If your app is for training purposes or for running what-if scenarios (routing changes for example), you don’t need a full real-time sync

13:15 - 13:35 Digital Twin Network: Concepts and Reference Architecture, Cheng Zhou, 10min + 10min Q&A
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhou-nmrg-digitaltwin-network-concepts/

  *   Rick: name-clash with the acronym DTN (Delay Tolerant Network)
  *   Laurent: suggestion Network Digital Twin
  *   Qin Wu: the draft supports one to one and one to many mapping between physical twin and digtial twin
  *   Kiran Makhijani: the segmentation based Digital Twin networks are more significant - based on application that will use them. I am actually debating should there be an exact replica of entire physical-network? there are data-regulation, security constraints that should be considered in creating replicas of network.
  *   Mohamed: whether a"exact" replication is needed will depend on the application
  *   Diego: the replica does not need to deal with the same traffic, but with aggregated data or knowledge
  *   Laurent: an interesting point is the various actors involved in the digital twin(s) or interactions between pieces composing the twin: different providers, operator(s), user(s) ; each contributing with different inputs and requirements
  *   Kiran Makhijani: I agree in principle. but i am myself unclear about the closed loop between say a virtual PLC and actual PLC.
  *   Diego Lopez: PLC = programmable logic controller? PLC = physical link circuit? PLC= ??? In the first case, the twin includes the controlled plant (actually, the relevant behaviro of the controlled plant)
  *   Kiran Makhijani: programmable logic controller. These are the endpoints in DTN (for several cases)
  *   Diego Lopez: So, as said, the twin focused on the relevant behavior of the controlled plant. And, depending on the application, that behavior is derived from actual real-time data, an AI, synthetic data, historical data or knowledge… The point is to evaluate not only the effect of specific control actions, but to evaluate specific situations under controlled conditions
  *   Philip Eardley: Diego - trying to understand your last sentence. “the effect of specific control actions” - this could be trying to optimise the production line? “evaluate specific situations under controlled conditions” - this could be the impact of a failure on part of the production line?
  *   Laurent Ciavaglia: simulating different scenarios (e.g. what-if, or optimization) and being able to understand / learn / anticipate on their actual effects in the real environment before / when they would happen
  *   Diego Lopez: Yes, with the addition to the second one that it can be considered not only for failures, but also for highly improbable events. (think of a viral event or a “perfect storm” of any nature)
  *   Jérôme: call for adoption NMRG procedure https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nmrg/CVEyLUvfxJk1Ud5WdM9Y5LGvQmU/. Revise the documents according to feedback received during meeting (or through the ML) and then we can go for a call for adoption on ML.

  *   Other topic (15 min)

13:35 - 13:50 Artificial Intelligence Framework for Network Management, Pedro Martinez-Julia, 10 min + 5min Q&A
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-pedro-nmrg-ai-framework-00.txt

  *   Olga : would be beneficial to add the intent-driven approach to the framework and how the two domains can co-exist together.
  *   Pedro: thank you. Will see how to interconnect the two approaches.

  *   AOB