Re: [5gangip] 5G and Slicing

[Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dirk,

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Dirk Kutscher <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> good discussion, and I agree to what has been said so far.
>
>
>
> A comprehensive virtualization and programmability approach in 5G could
> enable new, more adequate technologies for accessing named data, in-network
> storage and object-level security.
>
>
>
> Such an ICN layer could then again used for different service slices, for
> example IoT, real-time multimedia, web access.
>
>
>
> One interesting question would be what assumptions should be made on the
> underlay and its service model. In other words: what would be the common
> denominator for forwarding abstractions.
>
>
>
> Is that just L2 connectivity? Is it IPv6 as a pseudo L2?
>
>
>
> It would be great if the underlay would not get into the way of ICN
> multipath and broadcast communication capabilities, i.e., it should at least
> be possible to run over virtualized link layers in the access.
>
>
>
> BTW, there is a workshop at Waseda University on the Friday  before the IETF
> (i.e., this week) with a panel discussion that will touch upon some of those
> questions:
>
> http://jp.greenicn.org/workshop.html
>

Since you are giving a talk in this workshop, can you please invite
the attendees to subscribe to 5G IP list?

Regards,

Behcet
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Dirk
>
>
>
>
>
> From: 5gangip [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
> [e-mail]
> Sent: Montag, 26. Oktober 2015 14:04
> To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [5gangip] 5G and Slicing
>
>
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> I very much agree with what you detailed below – thanks a lot for that.
> Presuming that your list was not meant to be exhaustive, I would just add
> (still not achieving thus completeness) inline below as denoted by Dh>:
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
> Thanks and Best Regards
> Dirk
>
>
>
> From: AshwoodsmithPeter [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Dienstag, 20. Oktober 2015 21:04
> To: von Hugo, Dirk; [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: 5G and Slicing
>
>
>
> Hey Dirk,
>
>
>
> In my mind a “slice” consists of an end to end set of sub-slices. Where a
> sub-slice is what you get when you virtualize one of the following:
>
>
>
> UE
>
> UE Os/processes
>
> UE Antennas
>
> Antennas
>
>
>
> Dh> here I would add: antenna elements (as in massive MIMO)
>
>
>
> Time/Frequency
>
>
>
> Dh> here I would add: / code
>
>
>
> mmWave or uWave fronthaul
>
> DWDM fronthaul
>
> TDM fronthaul
>
> Packet fronthaul
>
> DC fabric
>
> DC servers
>
> Server VM’s
>
> Server Containers
>
> Server bare metal
>
> Server acceleration hardware
>
> Inter DC packet transport
>
> Inter DC optical transport
>
>
>
> In other words a slice has some subset of the UE, some subset of the
> spectrum, of the fronthaul, of the CRAN fabric etc. and is a 5G network in
> its own right. In fact a slice could run a 4G network end to end or even a
> 3G network end to end or even multiples of them using different bands I
> suppose.
>
>
>
> The method of virtualizing each of the above is different but clearly
> ACTN/GMPLS etc would cover DWDM/TDM fronthaul and inter C-RAN optical
> transport virtualization while traditional MPLS-TE/SR covers packet
> fronthaul/backhaul/inter C-RAN virtualization. Vxlan covers DC fabric
> virtualization etc. Of course the various L2/L3VPN technologies all can
> provide virtualization depending on the network architecture chosen and the
> degree of isolation desired among the slices at the packet layer.
>
>
>
> My point 4 – is aimed at what could you do within a slice that is not IPV6
> or IPv4 based. It would seem to me that one possible candidate is
> Information Centric Networking which “could” run in its own slice without
> disturbing any of the IP based operations in other slices. By doing so it
> can also have its own Radio Access Technology possibly better suited to low
> power devices, i.e. one that does not require signaling to reserve radio
> resources.
>
>
>
> So the way I see it the IETF/IRTF have three first areas of interest to 5G
> and slicing.
>
>
>
> Virtualization technologies ( that they are already doing) for different
> network technologies in the end to end slice.
>
> Applications that can run within a slice that are perhaps better suited to
> problem XXX.
>
> Technologies that can be used to improve IP mobility and therefore useful
> within a 5G slice running IPV6.
>
>
>
> Dh> I would replace IP mobility by more general IP connectivity including:
> mobility, (multi-(routing)) path selection, …
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 11:46 AM
> To: AshwoodsmithPeter; [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: 5G and Slicing
>
>
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> Thanks for pointing there. I agree with most ideas, especially that slicing
> is one of the major new issues in 5G – that may also refer to WG TEAS
> (Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling) and the concepts discussed
> there, especially with respect to drafts on ACTN (Abstraction and Control of
> TE Networks).
>
> With respect to your 4th comment on ‘non-ip ICN’ (here: Information-Centric
> Networking?) my question would be:
>
> - Do you mean non-IETF since ICNRG is an IRTF group (with drafts on IP
> isssues such as https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-icnrg-challenges-02)?
>
> - Or do you rather suggest to discuss also below-L3 naming issues for
> multi-path or heterogeneous RAN control?
>
> My feeling is that the latter item would be slightly out of scope in an
> IP-related discussion, let alone that cross layer information from L2 could
> assist L3 decisions in finding best IP addresses for routing paths etc. …
>
> Or did I misunderstand you?
>
> Thanks and Best Regards
> Dirk
>
>
>
> From: 5gangip [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
> AshwoodsmithPeter
> Sent: Montag, 19. Oktober 2015 20:40
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [5gangip] 5G and Slicing
>
>
>
> Greetings, just noticed the creation of this mailing list, not sure how much
> discussion has already occurred but thought I would mention a couple of
> points briefly.
>
>
>
> 1 – the concept of network slicing for 5G (the end to end ability to create
> multiple logical 5G networks from a physical infrastructure) most likely is
> relevant to all the different VPN technologies standardized at the IETF.
>
>
>
> 2- This could include GMPLS/WSON related TDM/DWDM to chop up the optical/TDM
> layer, IP VPN’s and all their flavors including VxLan etc. to slice at the
> packet layer and SDN/NFV for slicing of resources in the DC.
>
>
>
> 3-V6 and mobility within a slice for packet core behaviors.
>
>
>
> 4-new ‘non ip’ protocols like ICN within a slice for new applications with
> different RAT’s.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 5gangip mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip
>