Re: [Aeon] Comments and next step proposal

Hi Rong,

Thanks for your feedback, I guess that you raised one of key point that
3GPP may also consider today about interaction between operators and OTT, I
guess that today Rx interface are still diameter based, they may consider
other high layer protocols as well in the future. but in that case, I think
that they are more focusing on server side negotiation without involvement
client information, for example, client is sitting behind of NAT. and some
other granularity information.

I am cc to Farooq who is quite expert in this field.

Best regards,

-Hui

2014-04-23 16:11 GMT+08:00 Rong Zhang <rzhang.ietf@gmail.com>:

> Hi all,
>
> Speaking as the operator, I do see this trend that OTT are working with
> operators today which will help to improve the mobile internet user
> experience dramatically.
>
> I have one basic comment that current documents have n't talked about 3GPP
> PCRF Rx interface which will allow OTT to work with today's mobile
> operator, I will work with Sheng to write the gap analysis document by
> including how IETF work could be a complimentary to 3GPP's specificaiton.
>
> I am planning to attend next IETF meeting, and hope BoF will happen, I
> personally feel it is more Intarea scope than transport.
>
> Cheers.
>
> -Rong ZHANG
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>wrote:
>
>>  Hi, all,
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a real requirement from network operation perspective. Both ISPs
>> and ICPs can benefit from this advance collaborative network model.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rong Zhang and I are working on an gap analysis document, which we hope
>> to share publically early next week.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Sheng
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Aeon [mailto:aeon-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Fan, Peng
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 22, 2014 7:48 PM
>>
>> *To:* aeon@ietf.org
>> *Subject:* [Aeon] Comments and next step proposal
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Based on our operational experience, we have submitted a draft:
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fan-intarea-conet-ps-uc/
>>
>> The purposes of this draft are to encourage less DPI in the network and
>> propose more cooperation between OTT and Operators. Please kindly help to
>> review the draft and comment here.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have also reviewed the draft:
>>
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eckel-aeon-problem-statement/,
>>
>> My comments are:
>>
>> 1)      Shall we consider to split the section 4 into an independent gap
>> analysis document?
>>
>> 2)      For the requirements section, we agree Req. 1, 2, and 7, and
>> just want to clarify:
>>
>> a)       Req. 3 and 4, do you expect the interaction between network
>> node and host here before the real traffic start?
>>
>> b)       Req. 5 and 8 are not quite clear to us.
>>
>> c)        I guess that it not always mandatory to apply Diffserv here,
>> it could be optional?
>>
>> 3)      If you read our draft, we have more experience about the
>> limitation of current DPI/DFI in section 3.
>>
>> 4)      Analysis of other existing solutions like ACL configuration can
>> also be added in section 3.
>>
>>
>>
>> Also for the draft:
>>
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eckel-aeon-use-cases/
>>
>> Here I feel that too many use cases are listed here. You may consider
>> narrowing down to a few use cases for which we have strong and specific
>> needs, in order to get work further progressed.
>>
>>
>>
>> After reading the current work proposed here, we are wondering whether
>> two groups of people could work together to propose a BoF in the coming
>> IETF meeting. To do that, we probably can:
>>
>> 1)      Merge the PS draft into one document.
>>
>> 2)      Write an independent use case document.
>>
>> 3)      Write an gap analysis document.
>>
>> Once all three documents have finished, we could talk to ADs from both
>> Internet and Transport area about the next step?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your consideration.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Peng
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Aeon mailing list
>> Aeon@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aeon
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aeon mailing list
> Aeon@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aeon
>
>