Re: [Anima] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-du-anima-an-intent-04.txt

[Laurent Ciavaglia <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

There is some text in draft-peloso-anima-autonomic-function-01 
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-peloso-anima-autonomic-function-01) 
detailing what should be considered when installing, instantiating and 
operating AF/ASA.
Please see sections 3+.

Feedback on the text is most welcome as this will be presented at 
IETF96/Berlin.

Best regards, Laurent.


On 11/07/2016 14:55, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> I believe your description, and that of others as to what we "intend", 
> does not line up with the definition you quote.
>
> The text says that an ASA "implements an autonomic function." That 
> seems to say that I sould expect an autonomic function to be 
> implemented by an ASA, thus implying a 1-1 relationship.
>
> yet, your example states an AF of "bootstrapping", but the 
> funcitonality of the ASA being a much smaller piece.
>
> Net: No, the words do not clearly state what we intend.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 7/11/16 8:39 AM, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
> ...
>>>>> Also, how is the relevance for each ASA known?
>>>>
>>>> My proposal: Intent comes in sections; those sections are
>>>> labelled with the
>>> name of the ASA / autonomic function they belong to. Also here,
>>> there are many ways to do this, it's a simple proposal which could
>>> be optimised in many ways.
>>>>
>>>>> And is that the correct granularity of the section? Maybe the
>>>>> granularity should be individual objectives, or certain groups
>>>>> of objectives? I think this needs more discussion.
>>>>
>>>> On this one I agree!! We should have more discussions on that.
>>>> Your point
>>> from the other mail, that we should try implementing some ASAs
>>> would help understand this better.
>>>
>>> Yes. There's been an assumption, I think, that one "autonomic
>>> function" == one ASA. We need to be clear if that is an axiom, and
>>> we need to think about how ASAs are named, and if those names need
>>> to be registered somehow.
>>
>> Yes, that misunderstanding keeps popping up all the time.  I think
>> RFC7575 is quite clear:
>>
>> Autonomic Function: A feature or function that requires no
>> configuration and can derive all required information through self-
>> knowledge, discovery, or Intent.
>>
>> Autonomic Service Agent: An agent implemented on an autonomic node
>> that implements an autonomic function, either in part (in the case
>> of a distributed function) or whole.
>>
>> Example: There is the "autonomic function" "bootstrapping of new
>> nodes". It consists of 3 different ASAs: The new_device ASA, the
>> proxy ASA and the registrar ASA.
>>
>> How can we make that clearer? (I thought RFC7575 *is* clear).
> ...
>
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
>

-- 

Laurent Ciavaglia

Nokia, Bell Labs

[phone]

route de Villejust - Nozay, France

linkedin.com/in/laurent.ciavaglia