IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Anima] An IOT DIR review of draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 26 February 2018 21:17 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ADC3129C6C; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 13:17:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 WxzgtefgSHyl; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 13:17:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x234.google.com (mail-pg0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 202A212711E; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 13:17:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x234.google.com with SMTP id w17so6670904pgv.6; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 13:17:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=YdLq5XxcOEgM7PPKW3A1TfpJ8E5WCyqDkqRhaGsXeZo=; b=dKv2DFcmSfk8Y9sbVK4uP05jACVpnmwB5gJRg6lcGTWkPgW+fCqDsokCDtOiwljnky /g9XWU6Sn7F1gvQdBOl/m9BrpKFP61kEnG1Cl+Jg08E+svw8lHr1ks8F1Q9IuAhgURqf aFHrVyc6ifhCo/or/oVFgYS0NkpNC4RCIKF0t5jDJHqCRt9RNo8hDz1nO7S10bcvyuly GUrFxqPGqwe/oNxVRlnXYAuBuh0FePgtbO0csz2aLdDjn6Q/PEWbQXDc8xczLvhw/Cuq KVH6JPCwkEWToBeZKoIX7K/l2TAV1mVHSJGGnh2/uC5CCtwOZ/xMCmtru9WXaVW7pINu TyFw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=YdLq5XxcOEgM7PPKW3A1TfpJ8E5WCyqDkqRhaGsXeZo=; b=kCJ6OpHU0gRdJfAWRqeNARhWf985u2hDzIT0FNlfj7M1y3i6pu1xe1bMQiUPGZQwDv MIt5zEv4fE47PEmXjHi9QDhB/ie75FK6KHqxs35yytS1TumYsk63xSoZUWZxQzOARvZR XxyjnpTFB9pINUsUTKOPQQJRiopRMryBnsX1shIci61RJB3JR6zs1g8WwFdMxwtsSWSy cljHo0obVVf/P5qn69fbuVyGM+ZcMI6VPc4/LImf0n1Lmh9qQ35ZtNp3BN97M7fJ6wjr 79vYDhbsGXuIHwdvFvs0nwxQXDTTcaYsKyrfvGiiMl07XgxVjHnVhy9ilBlknvDGlDMq cH1A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPB3QLl1/voU0T+GHjK5iWGmkBGxNGL5Zv4jjp0nnfnu+og+iUeE 8QZSNnivCHFLmHa3qJAx8sPepuw/1KM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtbsC91WHyjvhl8Htb6q6nVR08nSWhszD33gzwsVFrHXW6H9EIkzC7yFQD57ZEfFm8sQPGy/Q==
X-Received: by 10.98.178.17 with SMTP id x17mr2510001pfe.2.1519679825361; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 13:17:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:df0:0:2006:c0da:ac17:5f6d:8e76? ([2001:df0:0:2006:c0da:ac17:5f6d:8e76]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x86sm20974282pfa.164.2018.02.26.13.17.02 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Feb 2018 13:17:04 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Brian Carpenter <becarpenter46@gmail.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, iot-dir <iot-dir@ietf.org>, "ops-dir@ietf.org" <ops-dir@ietf.org>, "int-dir@ietf.org" <int-dir@ietf.org>
Cc: "draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane@ietf.org>, "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>
References: <449b7e2f10094531b325919710696754@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e068fcbd-9693-99f4-934b-cfefd8468731@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:17:01 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <449b7e2f10094531b325919710696754@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/g-Ur1qGy6yAd2fYVnppwryp__oQ>
Subject: Re: [Anima] An IOT DIR review of draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 21:17:34 -0000

Pascal,

Great review!

> -          Section 3; the IOT certainly could use an ACP. It would be useful to scope the feature that is proposed in this document, whether it is compatible of not with constrained environments, whether it needs adaptations, point on Michael's enrollment draft. It would also be useful to indicate whether the ACP works between L3 bridges, IOW whether ACP operates the same (over IP) regardless of the packet forwarding layer in the data plane;

Perhaps this point belongs in draft-ietf-anima-reference-model. ANIMA is chartered for "professionally managed" networks, and the reference model says: "At a later stage ANIMA may define a scope for constrained nodes with a reduced ANI [autonomic infrastructure] and well-defined minimal functionality.  They are currently out of scope." So while your point is very valid, it's been considered out of scope so far.

I'll leave the rest of your excellent comments to the ACP authors.

Thanks
   Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email