Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON?
"Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com> Mon, 12 May 2014 10:05 UTC
Return-Path: <tireddy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: aeon@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: aeon@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 608A81A066D
for <aeon@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 May 2014 03:05:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.152
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.152 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 j4dfvB756xIS for <aeon@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Mon, 12 May 2014 03:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30FAA1A0667
for <aeon@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 May 2014 03:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;
d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6122; q=dns/txt; s=iport;
t=1399889112; x=1401098712;
h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:
content-transfer-encoding:mime-version;
bh=/wlt+LXz9DkbJNLyOu+TsTtPt6B5i3P8Yt6nVQKUWX8=;
b=GGu89ARPWdbTOq/yOQtyR1AKbSzYUDFbrxBr3E9qyn5+xJb4NGOlfqwT
pb+IPnOezka43rQw6vmqje1uZly6G8+7ud59jGqrO20NaewBNWDWyKtqj
goAagsSToarsjSPJRZEMgoQBFj1phdu3HJhaoJEWpxwa2M8vX4SNo/kwB 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnUFACWccFOtJA2K/2dsb2JhbABZgwZPWIJnwwUBGYEAFnSCJQEBAQQjEUUSAQgOAwMBAQEDAgYdAwIEHxEUAQgJAQQOBQgBEogSAxENqkadQg2GHxeBKosRgT8HAQEGGBYbgnw2gRUEl1aDLotjhWiDNm2BAAEIFyI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,1034,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="43007933"
Received: from alln-core-5.cisco.com ([173.36.13.138])
by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 May 2014 10:05:11 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com [173.37.183.84])
by alln-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s4CA5BZi023979
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL);
Mon, 12 May 2014 10:05:11 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([169.254.15.76]) by
xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([173.37.183.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Mon, 12
May 2014 05:05:10 -0500
From: "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
To: Rong Zhang <rzhang.ietf@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON?
Thread-Index: Ac9tyaUUyAKZQLPiSMyj+A12Trneyg==
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 10:05:10 +0000
Message-ID: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A243304FB@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [173.39.67.182]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aeon/xgcjb1OIsDhfzqBHCkJWyep5ICo
Cc: "aeon@ietf.org" <aeon@ietf.org>,
"Charles Eckel \(eckelcu\)" <eckelcu@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON?
X-BeenThere: aeon@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application Enabled Open Networking \(AEON\)" <aeon.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/aeon>,
<mailto:aeon-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/aeon/>
List-Post: <mailto:aeon@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:aeon-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aeon>,
<mailto:aeon-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 10:05:20 -0000
draft-fan and the use case in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eckel-aeon-use-cases-01#section-2.5 only address one set of problems. It would not be possible for all content providers to have tie-up with ISP, for example subscriber could be watching movie from a content provider who does not have tie-up with ISP, downloading files using P2P protocols like BitTorrent, backing up data to cloud storage like Amazon, playing on-line games, use WebRTC to make calls etc. It is not possible in some of the above scenarios that there will be business agreements with ISP. Various networks including Mobile, Home and Enterprise network need a mechanism to offer differentiated services for the above traffic. -Tiru From: Rong Zhang [mailto:rzhang.ietf@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 1:01 PM To: Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) Cc: Charles Eckel (eckelcu); aeon@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? For my reading, draft-fan is not only mobile broadband, but also cover fixed broadband, that's the reason why gap analysis does mention broadband forum. For my impress, draft-fan is more generic, and cover today's real use case and operators's requirement, draft-eckel is more enterprise related and less baking here. I am not the author of this two documents, but recommend to start with the operator driven and urgent requriement. The best way to move forward to have generic PS/Use case which cover mobile broadband, fixed broadband, enterprise network with limited use cases Cheers, Rong Zhang On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) <tireddy@cisco.com> wrote: draft-fan-intarea-conet-ps-uc-00 is specific to Mobile Networks where it has tie-up with third party content providers. It’s very similar to use case described in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eckel-aeon-use-cases-01#section-2.5. draft-eckel-aeon-problem-statement is not discussing any use cases and but the limitations with existing solutions and requirements for solving the problem. It can be updated to include the requirement to solve the problem of identifying over-the-top services which is a problem even in Enterprise networks. -Tiru From: Aeon [mailto:aeon-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Charles Eckel (eckelcu) Sent: Friday, May 09, 2014 12:18 AM To: Rong Zhang Cc: aeon@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Hi Rong, Thanks for clarifying. There are pros and cons between combining topics into a single document vs. having several smaller documents. It would be relatively straightforward to divide the drafts as you suggest, and it would probably simplify merging information in the AEON and CONET drafts as well. Cheers, Charles From: Rong Zhang <rzhang.ietf@gmail.com> Date: Saturday, May 3, 2014 at 8:06 PM To: Charles Eckel <eckelcu@cisco.com> Cc: "aeon@ietf.org" <aeon@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Hi Charles, What I mean is that draft-eckel-aeon-problem-statement-01 have too many use cases and solutions related content, but I see: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-fan-intarea-conet-ps-uc-00.txt quite focus on problem statement, so I would like to suggest that we start from second draft about PS, some of your draft could be merged into that draft. and then we could have seperate requirement draft( which maybe from AEON PS), and another gap analsysis draft. cheers. Rong Zhang On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <eckelcu@cisco.com> wrote: Hi Rong, Sorry for the delay in responding. I am not sure I understand what you are asking for here, but perhaps this previous thread will be of help: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/aeon/current/msg00033.html Cheers, Charles From: Rong Zhang <rzhang.ietf@gmail.com> Date: Sunday, April 27, 2014 at 7:07 AM To: "aeon@ietf.org" <aeon@ietf.org> Subject: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Hello all, I have been observing the comments here, it seems that some operators are discussing the current problems about COllaborative NETwork and how current 3GPP Rx is not sufficient, and also some requirements and gap analysis. But for Aeon's case, we haven't seen any operators illustrating how they are similarl between COllaborative NETwork and AEON's problem. Can anybody from AEON kindly help to elaborate more here? cheers, Rong Zhang
- [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Rong Zhang
- Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Rong Zhang
- Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Rong Zhang
- Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Rong Zhang
- Re: [Aeon] COllaborative NETwork vs AEON? Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)