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

[Laurent Ciavaglia <[e-mail]>]

On 11/07/2016 14:39, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Sent: 11 July 2016 14:16
>> To: Michael Behringer (mbehring) <[e-mail]>; Laurent Ciavaglia
>> <[e-mail]>; anima <[e-mail]>
>> Subject: Re: [Anima] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-du-anima-an-
>> intent-04.txt
>>
>> On 11/07/2016 19:22, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Anima [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Brian E
>>>> Carpenter
>>>> Sent: 09 July 2016 12:39
>>>> To: Laurent Ciavaglia <[e-mail]>; anima
>>>> <[e-mail]>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Anima] Fwd: New Version Notification for
>>>> draft-du-anima-an- intent-04.txt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.
Michael: in your example, the agents represent different parts of the AF 
functionality.
There is an additional dimension: an AF can be deployed over multiple 
resources(/devices). An ASA, encompassing the whole AF functionality, 
would then be instantiated on each device. E.g. a load-balancing AF 
deployed over a set of routers (each router will get an ASA of the load 
balancing AF).

>
> How can we make that clearer? (I thought RFC7575 *is* clear).
I think that progressing on the life-cycle management will describe how 
the different elements (AF, ASA, management functions) interacts and 
when/why/how they are instantiated. This will be presented (again) with 
more details in IETF96/Berlin.
The other discussion thread on the "code" thing is also useful to get a 
better understanding IMO.
finally, the text on ASA in the reference model (or larger side 
document) could be used to augment / improve the text of RFC7575.

Best regards, Laurent.