Re: [Actn] ACTN progress
Igor Bryskin <IBryskin@advaoptical.com> Thu, 15 January 2015 13:54 UTC
Return-Path: <IBryskin@advaoptical.com>
X-Original-To: actn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: actn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623091B2BE1 for <actn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 05:54:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.609
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R-rEGLGue_tJ for <actn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 05:54:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail3.advaoptical.com (mail3.advaoptical.com [74.202.24.82]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3B2E1B2BE7 for <actn@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 05:54:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com (atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com [172.16.5.39]) by atl-vs-fsmail.advaoptical.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t0FDsB8H019128 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 15 Jan 2015 08:54:12 -0500
Received: from ATL-SRV-MBX1.advaoptical.com (172.16.5.45) by atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com (172.16.5.39) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 08:54:11 -0500
Received: from ATL-SRV-MBX1.advaoptical.com (172.16.5.45) by ATL-SRV-MBX1.advaoptical.com (172.16.5.45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1044.25; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 08:54:10 -0500
Received: from ATL-SRV-MBX1.advaoptical.com ([fe80::6433:f8f:ea41:a6e1]) by ATL-SRV-MBX1.advaoptical.com ([fe80::6433:f8f:ea41:a6e1%14]) with mapi id 15.00.1044.021; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 08:54:10 -0500
From: Igor Bryskin <IBryskin@advaoptical.com>
To: 윤빈영 <byyun@etri.re.kr>, Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>, "actn@ietf.org" <actn@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Actn] ACTN progress
Thread-Index: AQHQMC308tSg7ME7yU+pGcFkE52EMJzA8UiAgABCxdA=
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 13:54:10 +0000
Message-ID: <df99aeb9510e4fd7b176ceafbab906a5@ATL-SRV-MBX1.advaoptical.com>
References: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729C70587@dfweml706-chm> <eecc34a2c82e438fb09897d328c03d0a@ATL-SRV-MBX1.advaoptical.com> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729C719C6@dfweml706-chm> <23C934174FAD8C4EACF66FEFB6AE43391D774143@SMTP1.etri.info>
In-Reply-To: <23C934174FAD8C4EACF66FEFB6AE43391D774143@SMTP1.etri.info>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.16.5.49]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_df99aeb9510e4fd7b176ceafbab906a5ATLSRVMBX1advaopticalco_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.13.68, 1.0.33, 0.0.0000 definitions=2015-01-15_05:2015-01-15,2015-01-15,1970-01-01 signatures=0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/actn/LIbu9_5y1eXSuUOw75It-KItwvw>
Subject: Re: [Actn] ACTN progress
X-BeenThere: actn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Abstraction and Control of Transport Networks \(ACTN\)" <actn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/actn>, <mailto:actn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/actn/>
List-Post: <mailto:actn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:actn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/actn>, <mailto:actn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 13:54:27 -0000
Hi Bin, Your understanding is correct. Conceptually, the interfaces are the same. Practically, a given interface may support only a sub-set of functionality. Igor From: ACTN [mailto:actn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ??? Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 11:51 PM To: Leeyoung; actn@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Hi Young, I like to catch up with you. So I like to translate your saying into my words for my clear understanding as follows. For future ACTN work, we will keep the same architecture consisting of CNC-MDSC-PNC, and the interfaces between them should be the same as Igor insists. Each controller has the same functions conceptually, but some functions may not be used depending on the type of controller(MDSC/PNC). In order to implement the models(Provisioning, OAM, etc.) required for transport SDN, ACTN will describe the interface of each controller based on the architecture of CNC-MDSC-PNC. The interfaces between the controllers may be different practically due to some functions not used. We can say like the following if those above are true. Some can implement a super(general) transport SDN controller to support all the functions, while other can implement specific purposed(targeted) controllers such as PNC and MDSC. For the former, the CMI is the same as the MPI. For the latter, the CMI may not be the same as the MPI due to some functions not used. ACTN will follow the latter for T-SDN implementation incorporating existing control systems like GMPLS and EMS/NMS. Correct me if there is any misunderstanding. Thanks, Bin From: Leeyoung [mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 4:12 AM To: actn@ietf.org<mailto:actn@ietf.org> Subject: [Actn] ACTN progress Hi All, Just wanted to share some private emails exchanged among a limited interested parties in the past week with a permission with Igor. In a nutshell, I think we are converging with a common view on ACTN interfaces and architecture. Please check the following email thread. Please comment if you have any question. Thanks, Young From: Igor Bryskin [mailto:IBryskin@advaoptical.com] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 2:13 PM To: Leeyoung; Daniele Ceccarelli Cc: AshwoodsmithPeter Subject: RE: Recap this morning's call Hi Young, You’ve captured all pretty accurately. I nominate you for the ACTN scribe job :=) Igor From: Leeyoung [mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 3:09 PM To: Igor Bryskin; Daniele Ceccarelli Cc: AshwoodsmithPeter Subject: Recap this morning's call Hi Igor, Thanks for this morning’s call. I just wanted to recap what was agreed upon. Please feel free to correct if anything needs to be corrected. We have identified several models to be implemented in ACTN control hierarchy (CNC-MDSC-PNC). Among them are, but not limited to: 1. Topology Model 2. Provisioning Model 3. Service Model 4. OAM Model 5. Client Mapping/Policy Model There could be more to the list. We can identify and add later on if we will. Now, with these models, different components (i.e., different controller type) will implement whatever relevant models and support its interfaces. For instance, PNC may need not support Client mapping/policy model while CNC may not need to support Provisioning model. We also agree that MDSC can interface another MDSC or PNCs with transparency. MDSC should not be able to distinguish if it interfaces MDSC or PNCs (i.e., the same interface). And you also said, CNC interfacing MDSC should be essentially the same interface as MDSC interfacing another MDSC or PNCs. Let us start from here. Then we can discuss further. Thanks, Young
- [Actn] ACTN progress Leeyoung
- [Actn] 答复: ACTN progress Zhenghaomian
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress 윤빈영
- [Actn] 答复: ACTN progress Zhenghaomian
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress 윤빈영
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Arashmid Akhavain
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Dhruv Dhody
- [Actn] 答复: ACTN progress Zhenghaomian
- Re: [Actn] 答复: ACTN progress Dhruv Dhody
- [Actn] R: 答复: ACTN progress Daniele Ceccarelli
- [Actn] 答复: 答复: ACTN progress Zhenghaomian
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress 윤빈영
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)
- Re: [Actn] 答复: 答复: ACTN progress Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Dave Hood
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Arashmid Akhavain
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Arashmid Akhavain
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Arashmid Akhavain
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress 윤빈영
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress Zhangxian (Xian)
- Re: [Actn] ACTN progress BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)
- [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Leeyoung
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Arashmid Akhavain
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Arashmid Akhavain
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Dave Hood
- [Actn] 答复: MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Zhenghaomian
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) 윤빈영
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Zhangxian (Xian)
- [Actn] R: MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Daniele Ceccarelli
- [Actn] R: MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Dave Hood
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Actn] MSDC-PNC m:n (was R: ACTN progress) Arashmid Akhavain