Re: [Anima] Next steps for the reference document

Hi Michael.
I am willing to contribute with intent, conflict resolution, and management
topics.
Jéferson

Em qui, 4 de jun de 2015 às 10:18, Michael Behringer (mbehring) <
mbehring@cisco.com> escreveu:

> Thanks for all who volunteered to participate in the reference doc. While
> detailed discussions may be between the contributors, the main technical
> discussions should probably take place on the main list. Here, I summarise
> my view on what needs to be done in the reference document.
>
> If someone thinks he/she can produce text for the respective sections,
> please let me / the list know.
>
> The overall goal is to show how all the various drafts, protocols, and
> discussions in the ANIMA WG fit together.
>
> Points to address:
>
> -       We should have a short section on intent. Explaining ingest of
> intent, distribution, the nature (on top of what's in RFC7575). That intent
> is signed, time stamps, etc. Probably pointing back to RFC7575. (Note
> intent distribution is handled in section 7.3)
> -       Do we want to address "constrained" AN nodes, with limited
> capabilities, here? I think so... We'll need that for AN in constrained
> environments. This could go into a new section in section 3: "constrained
> network elements".
> -       The masa section needs to be written. The masa will be an optional
> element. Needs to point to the bootstrap draft, which explains the basics.
> -       Naming section needs meat. What names are used for, where it is in
> the domain cert.
> -       Addressing section needs to bring in recent discussions. Needs to
> include how an ASA uses addressing. per node or per ASA. (I think we
> concluded per node).
> -       Domain certificate template. We should write a section on the AN
> domain certificate. How the various fields are used.
> -       Need to explain sub-domains
> -       Section 9 needs to be worked out. This is all about conflict
> resolution. Maybe we should re-name that section? RFC 7575 already mentions
> this. Maybe we don't need much more here.
> -       trust management: inside a domain, between domain and sub-domain,
> and between domains. This should become a new section.
> -       Need to treat the question of the "out of band" ACP versus the
> inline ACP. The two models both work, but there are implications, different
> benefits, drawbacks, etc. This needs to be explained.
> -       Routing: In the case of a virtually separate ACP, as in
> draft-behringer-anima-autonomic-control-plane, we need to also define a
> routing protocol (thinking of the discussion in homenet, this might be
> "fun"...)
> -       Need considerations for APIs: How can ASAs use the ANI?
> -       Need considerations for a data model. What it should cover, scope.
> -       We should also describe the management angle
> -       Security considerations need to be expanded. Threat analysis needs
> work; need general security considerations, talk about the PKI and trust
> model, etc.
>
> Thoughts? Anything missing? Any volunteer for a specific part?
>
> Michael
>
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list
> Anima@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
>