Re: [Actn] charter 1.4

[Leeyoung <[e-mail]>]

Hi Kenji,

It is great to hear from you. Thanks for pointing to KDDI's use-case. Indeed your use-case draft has been an important draft from which we extracted many requirements for ACTN and even some wording for this charter. 

Best regards,
Young

-----Original Message-----
From: Kenji Kumaki [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 10:34 PM
To: Leeyoung; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [Actn] charter 1.4

Hi Young,

Thank you for your update for the charter.
It seems good that the charter includes the context of our draft.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kumaki-actn-multitenant-vno-00

Thanks,
Kenji

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ACTN [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Leeyoung
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 8:19 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [Actn] charter 1.4
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a charter revision (v.1.4) for your comment. Your comment will 
> be appreciated. If there are any key missing items for the WG to work 
> that you feel should be included in the charter or any other discussions on terminology and clarify, please share your views  to the list. We look forward to seeing your active participation.
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Young
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------------
> 
> Last Updated: December 5, 2014
> 
> 
> 
> Draft Charter V1.4
> 
> 
> 
> Abstraction and Control of Transport Networks (ACTN)
> 
> 
> 
> Transport networks are defined as network infrastructure that provides
> 
> connectivity and bandwidth for customer services. They are 
> characterized
> 
> by their ability to support server layer provisioning and traffic
> 
> engineering for client layer services, such that resource guarantees 
> may
> 
> be provided to their customers. Transport networks here refer to a set
> 
> of different type of connection-oriented networks, which include
> 
> Connection-Oriented Circuit Switched (CO-CS) networks and Connection-
> 
> Oriented Packet Switched (CO-PS) networks. This implies that at least
> 
> the following transport networks are in scope: Layer 1 (L1) and Layer 
> 0
> 
> (L0) optical networks (e.g., OTN, ODU, OCh/WSON), MPLS-TP, MPLS-TE, as
> 
> well as other emerging network technologies with connection-oriented
> 
> behavior.
> 
> 
> 
> Transport networks have a variety of mechanisms to:
> 
> 
> 
> - Facilitate separation of data plane and control plane,
> 
> 
> 
> - Allow for distributed signaling or centralized models (e.g., NMS-
> 
>   based or centralized signaling) for path setup and protection, and
> 
> 
> 
> - Provide traffic engineering mechanism via centralized path
> 
>   computation.
> 
> 
> 
> These represent key technologies for enabling flexible and dynamic
> 
> networking, and efficient control and recovery of resources. Although
> 
> these technologies provide significant benefits within a single domain
> 
> control boundary, they do not meet the growing need for transport
> 
> network virtualization in multi-domain transport networks. More and 
> more
> 
> network operators are building and operating on multi-domain transport
> 
> networks. These domains (collections of links and nodes) may be each 
> of
> 
> a different technology, administrative zones, or vendor-specific
> 
> islands. Establishment of end-to-end connections spanning multiple
> 
> domains is a perpetual problem for operators because of both 
> operational
> 
> concerns (control plane and management plane) and interoperability
> 
> issues (control plane and data plane).  Due to these issues, new
> 
> services that require connections that traverse multiple domains need
> 
> significant planning and often manual operations to interface 
> different
> 
> vendor equipment and technology.
> 
> 
> 
> The aim of Abstraction and Control of Transport Networks (ACTN) is to
> 
> facilitate a centralized virtual network operation: the creation of a
> 
> virtualized environment allowing operators to view and control multi-
> 
> subnet, multi-technology, multi-vendor domain networks. This will 
> enable
> 
> rapid service deployment of new dynamic and elastic services, and will
> 
> improve overall network operations and scaling of existing services.
> 
> Discussion with operators has also highlighted a need for
> 
> virtual network coordination based on the abstraction of underlying
> 
> technology and vendor domains as well as virtual service coordination
> 
> based on service-related knowledge. Abstraction of transport networks
> 
> also allows operators to consolidate their network services into
> 
> multi-tenant virtual transport networks.
> 
> 
> 
> Virtual network coordination function in ACTN is built on a control
> 
> hierarchy where a multi-domain coordinator interacts with the control
> 
> mechanism for each domain (e.g., EMS/NMS, GMPLS/PCE control plane, SDN
> 
> controller) to represent abstraction of network resources and to 
> provide
> 
> control functions for virtual networks. These control functions enable
> 
> various services/clients/applications to create and manage their own
> 
> virtual networks that share the common transport network resources.
> 
> 
> 
> Virtual service coordination function in ACTN incorporates
> 
> customer's service-related knowledge in virtual network operation in 
> order to
> 
> seamlessly operate virtual networks while meeting customer's service
> 
> requirements.
> 
> 
> 
> The ACTN facilitates seamless vertical service coordination across
> 
> multi-tenant customers (primarily internal service organizations with
> 
> respect to a network operator), the control of virtual and physical
> 
> network domains, as well as a horizontal E2E service coordination
> 
> across multi-domain networks.
> 
> 
> 
> The ACTN working group works to develop a high-level architecture that
> 
> describes the basic building-blocks necessary to enable the 
> multi-domain
> 
> virtual service coordination. It will identify key building components 
> and
> 
> the corresponding interfaces among these components. The Key 
> components can
> 
> be future building block or legacy components existing today. It will
> 
> clearly show the  interaction between the customer controller
> 
> and the virtual network controller, and the virtual network controller 
> and
> 
> the physical network controllers with possibility for recursion.
> 
> 
> 
> The ACTN working group will develop the requirements for these 
> interfaces
> 
> and extend existing protocols and data models if necessary with 
> coordination
> 
> with other WGs  or to develop new protocols and data models uniquely 
> identified
> 
> in scope of ACTN WG.
> 
> 
> 
> The ACTN WG will coordinate with the following working groups:
> 
> 
> 
> - With the TEAS WG regarding TE architecture and generic TE
> 
>    Information and Data Model. ACTN will extend these models
> 
>    for its use cases.
> 
> 
> 
> - With the CCAMP WG regarding abstraction of technology specific Data
> 
>   Models
> 
> 
> 
> - With the PCE WG on uses of a PCE in the ACTN architecture.
> 
> 
> 
> - With the IDR WG on the use of BGP-LS in ACTN.
> 
> 
> 
> In doing this work, the WG will cooperate with external SDOs as
> 
> necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> The working group will work on the following items:
> 
> 
> 
> - Develop an applicability document based on use cases. This work will
> 
>   support the architecture and serve as the repository of requirement
> 
>   sets that include: support of APIs/protocols and information models.
> 
> 
> 
> - Complete architecture that describes the basic building blocks to
> 
>   enable virtual network and service coordination.
> 
> 
> 
> - Evaluate gap of existing IETF and other protocols, encoding 
> languages
> 
>   and data models to fulfill the requirements. Where the need for data
> 
>   models is identified, the working group will first examine data 
> models
> 
>   already developed by other working groups.
> 
> 
> 
> - Work on data models that are uniquely identified in the scope of ACTN.
> 
>   It is envisioned to work on issues of security, privacy, and trust 
> in
> 
>   mechanisms that provide abstraction across domain boundaries
> 
>  (and therefore across trust boundaries) and the abstraction of
> 
>   customer's service-specific models.
> 
> 
> 
> - Develop protocol extensions as deemed necessary to support unique
> 
>   requirements of controller interfaces.
> 
> 
> 
> Milestones
> 
> 
> 
> May 2015   Adopt the WG draft on the Applicability of ACTN.
> 
> Aug 2015   Adopt the WG draft on the ACTN Architecture.
> 
> Sep 2015   Adopt the WG draft on Gap Analysis and YANG models.
> 
> Nov 2015   Adopt the WG drafts on Protocol Extensions for basic models.
> 
> Feb 2016   Submit the Applicability of ACTN to IESG as an informational
> 
>            RFC.
> 
>                       Adopt the WG drafts on Protocol Extensions for 
> advanced
> 
>            models.
> 
> Apr 2016   Submit the ACTN Architecture to IESG for review as an
> 
>            informational RFC.
> 
> May 2016   Submit the Gap Analysis and YANG model(s) document to IESG for
> 
>            review as Proposed Standards RFC.
> 
> Jul 2016   Submit the Protocol Extensions for basic models to IESG for
> 
>            review as Proposed Standards RFCs.
> 
> Sep 2016   Submit the Protocol Extensions for advanced models to IESG for
> 
>            Review as Proposed Standard RFCs.
> 
> Nov 2016   recharter or conclude the WG.