Subject: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:13:51 +0000

Hi all,

To be informed!

Please note that this version is modified based on the comments that we received yesterday during the bar BOF meeting.

The main comments that we received during the APONF bar BOF were:

The main comments were:

=> specify clearly the protocvol standardisation activities

=> APONF should use Nteconf/Yang for the notrthbound interface

=> APONF should focus on defining an Yang model based network service graph to represent the abstratcion of the network inferastructure

=> emphasize more clearly that APONF should define application based policies and how they can be maaped into network managent policies.

In the slides I have tried to capture the above!

Please note that we will be sending the minutes of the bar BOF meeting soon!

Best regards,

Georgios

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 18:26:09 -0400

Follow-up below, expressing my understanding of further details agreed 
last night.

On 14-07-22 05:13 PM, [email-masked] wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> To be informed!
>
> Please note that this version is modified based on the comments that we
> received yesterday during the bar BOF meeting.
>
...

Procedurally: when a new service is defined, the Network Management (NM) 
Application function downloads an initial network service graph to the 
NM Control function. The data includes triggers for NM Control to feed 
back updates to the graph. When one of these triggers is engaged, NM 
Control sends back a refreshed network service graph.

Discussion Point 1: I am trying to relate this to SFC as a service. The 
starting point is the Service Function Chain. This has to be translated 
into one or more instances of a Service Function Path, which get passed 
to the Service Classifier. Path derivation is logically something NM 
Control would be responsible for. Which APONF function would be 
responsible for distributing the path information to the Classifier(s)?

Discussion Point 2: to do its mapping between information gathered from 
Network Elements (NE) and the network service graphs, NM Control needs a 
database associating NE-provided attributes with service-specific 
labels. Would downloading of such a dictionary be part of APONF 
responsibilities, or would we leave creation of the database to be an 
operator-specific matter?

I stand to be corrected on my basic understanding of APONF operation,
and welcome comments on the discussion points.

Tom Taylor

---

From: "Jun Bi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:22:41 -0400

I have a suggestion to change the terminology.

For figure 1 on page 4, the "end user application" is not a good term.

I noticed that the figure in the latest PPT from Georgios and Tina, " end
user application" was changed to "network service". I think it is good.

So one page 5 of APONF problem statement draft:

"Network Management Application: Operational Support System (OSS) like
applications that help a communication service provider to monitor, control,
analyze and manage a communication network."

Could we change " Network Management Application" to "Network Service", to
be consist with the latest figure ?

In addition, may I propose we also change "Network Management Application
System" to "Network Service System" ? 

Change the definition "Network management application systems: Systems or
platforms that run the network management application."
To
"Network Service Systems: Systems or platforms that run the network
service."

Best Regards,
Jun Bi

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Tom Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 6:26 PM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Follow-up below, expressing my understanding of further details agreed last
night.

...

Tom Taylor

_______________________________________________
Openv6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openv6

---

From: "Jun Bi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 19:27:06 -0400

One example to use APONF for SAVI (source address validation improvements).

Thanks!

Jun

-----Original Message-----
From: Jun Bi [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 11:23 AM
To: 'Tom Taylor'; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'
Subject: RE: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Best Regards,
Jun Bi

-----Original Message-----

On 14-07-22 05:13 PM, [email-masked] wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> To be informed!
>
> Please note that this version is modified based on the comments that 
> we received yesterday during the bar BOF meeting.
>
...

Procedurally: when a new service is defined, the Network Management (NM)
Application function downloads an initial network service graph to the NM
Control function. The data includes triggers for NM Control to feed back
updates to the graph. When one of these triggers is engaged, NM Control
sends back a refreshed network service graph.

Discussion Point 1: I am trying to relate this to SFC as a service. The
starting point is the Service Function Chain. This has to be translated into
one or more instances of a Service Function Path, which get passed to the
Service Classifier. Path derivation is logically something NM Control would
be responsible for. Which APONF function would be responsible for
distributing the path information to the Classifier(s)?

Discussion Point 2: to do its mapping between information gathered from
Network Elements (NE) and the network service graphs, NM Control needs a
database associating NE-provided attributes with service-specific labels.
Would downloading of such a dictionary be part of APONF responsibilities, or
would we leave creation of the database to be an operator-specific matter?

I stand to be corrected on my basic understanding of APONF operation, and
welcome comments on the discussion points.

Tom Taylor

---

From: "Jun Bi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 19:28:32 -0400

BTW, shall we change the name of mailing-list to [email-masked] ?

Thanks,
Jun

-----Original Message-----
From: Jun Bi [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 7:27 PM
To: [email-masked]'
Subject: RE: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Thanks!

Jun

-----Original Message-----
From: Jun Bi [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 11:23 AM
To: 'Tom Taylor'; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'
Subject: RE: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Best Regards,
Jun Bi

-----Original Message-----

...

Tom Taylor

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 08:22:52 +0000

Hi Ji,

Than ks for your suggestions!
We will change the following terms:

Network Management Application" to "Network Service" 

Network Management Application System" to "Network Service System" 

Best regards,
Georgios

________________________________________
Van: Jun Bi [[email-masked]]
Verzonden: donderdag 24 juli 2014 17:22
Aan: 'Tom Taylor'; Karagiannis, G. (EWI); [email-masked]
Onderwerp: RE: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Best Regards,
Jun Bi

-----Original Message-----

...

Tom Taylor

---

From: "Jun Bi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 05:21:06 -0400

Thank you very much!

Jun

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
[email-masked]
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 4:23 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Hi Ji,

Best regards,
Georgios

Best Regards,
Jun Bi

-----Original Message-----

...

Tom Taylor