Re: [Apn] [Network-tokens] [arch-d] Questions for APN: Q#6 and Q#7

"Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)" <pengshuping@huawei.com> Tue, 29 September 2020 01:30 UTC

Return-Path: <pengshuping@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: apn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 091FD3A0ABB; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 18:30:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 gR4PqftiBDGh; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 18:30:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F3A23A0AF1; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 18:30:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml732-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 84C48BF153700833A372; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 02:30:53 +0100 (IST)
Received: from lhreml732-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.83) by lhreml732-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 02:30:53 +0100
Received: from DGGEML423-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.40) by lhreml732-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1913.5 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 02:30:52 +0100
Received: from DGGEML512-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.223]) by dggeml423-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.40]) with mapi id 14.03.0487.000; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 09:30:48 +0800
From: "Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)" <pengshuping@huawei.com>
To: "tony.li@tony.li" <tony.li@tony.li>
CC: "apn@ietf.org" <apn@ietf.org>, "network-tokens@ietf.org" <network-tokens@ietf.org>, "architecture-discuss@iab.org" <architecture-discuss@iab.org>
Thread-Topic: [Network-tokens] [arch-d] Questions for APN: Q#6 and Q#7
Thread-Index: AdaU0XxCWPBVd7lVREmNNDRNL/eXE///uv2A//1nUoA=
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 01:30:48 +0000
Message-ID: <4278D47A901B3041A737953BAA078ADE19435F17@dggeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <4278D47A901B3041A737953BAA078ADE19424A8B@dggeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <C2F56D47-ABAE-41C2-9AC9-F74EB7D6A8AE@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <C2F56D47-ABAE-41C2-9AC9-F74EB7D6A8AE@tony.li>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.153.195.37]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4278D47A901B3041A737953BAA078ADE19435F17dggeml512mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apn/aMXOnmGlvBnP5JTt3_pDbfH9IZc>
Subject: Re: [Apn] [Network-tokens] [arch-d] Questions for APN: Q#6 and Q#7
X-BeenThere: apn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Application-aware Networking <apn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apn>, <mailto:apn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/apn/>
List-Post: <mailto:apn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apn>, <mailto:apn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 01:30:59 -0000

Hi Tony,

Please refer to the following drafts. Some related descriptions can be found in these drafts.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-apn-framework-01#section-5
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-6man-app-aware-ipv6-network-02

Basically, the information carried in the IP layer is used for traffic steering policy selection within a limited APN network domain in order to guarantee the SLA requirements.

Best regards,
Shuping



From: Network-tokens [mailto:network-tokens-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of tony.li@tony.li
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 1:17 AM
To: Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) <pengshuping@huawei.com>
Cc: apn@ietf.org; network-tokens@ietf.org; architecture-discuss@iab.org
Subject: Re: [Network-tokens] [arch-d] Questions for APN: Q#6 and Q#7


Hi Shuping,

Just how many bits are we talking then? And where are they in the packet?

Tony


On Sep 27, 2020, at 6:26 AM, Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) <pengshuping@huawei.com<mailto:pengshuping@huawei.com>> wrote:

Dear all,

#6. Is the fine-granularity operation needed/desired in the network?
Answers: 5G enables various demanding applications that desire high reliability and ultra-low latency requirements. These demanding applications or mission-critical applications desire to be differentiated and treated specially. However, in the current network with the existing mechanisms, these fine-granularity requirements cannot be fulfilled.

#7. Why not just use DSCP?
Answers: DSCP is only a few bits and not sufficient for indicating the various applications and their different requirements. It needs much richer expressions than the DSCP. Moreover, DSCP can be remarked at the network edge.

Best regards,
Shuping



From: Lizhenbin
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 10:35 PM
To: apn@ietf.org<mailto:apn@ietf.org>
Cc: Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) <pengshuping@huawei.com<mailto:pengshuping@huawei.com>>
Subject: Question List for APN

Hi Folks,
Thanks very much for your attention to APN work. After much preparation work, we summarized the key questions to be clarified for APN which also were always asked. In fact in the past discussion and the APN side meeting of IETF108, many of these questions were discussed and clarified. Here we propose these questions together for your convenience.

The questions to be clarified are as follows:
#1. Which layer is for APN to do the application-aware work?
#2. Does APN provide services within a limited-domain or Internet?
#3. Which area in IETF would the APN work fit better?
#4. What is the relationship between APN and other attempts in IETF’s history?
#5. What are the valuable use cases/usage scenarios of APN?
#6. Is the fine-granularity operations needed/desired in the network?
#7. Why not just use DSCP?
#8. Does APN violate network neutrality?
#9. Will APN raise security issues since application-aware information is carried in the APN packets?
#10. Will APN raise privacy issues since application-aware information is carried in the APN packets?

Shuping Peng will send the detailed answers for these questions in the mailing list in the following one or two weeks. The questions and answers may be not only be sent in the APN mailing list, but also be copied to the architecture discussion mailing list and the network token mailing list for more cross-area feedback if necessary.

If you have any comments on these questions and answers, we can go on to discuss through the mailing list.


Best Regards,
Zhenbin (Robin)




From: Apn [mailto:apn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lizhenbin
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:22 PM
To: apn@ietf.org<mailto:apn@ietf.org>
Subject: [Apn] Welcome to APN Mailing List

Hi Folks,

Welcome to join the APN mailing list. We are glad to have more discussion through the mailing list as the follow-up of the IETF108 APN side meeting.
In the process of APN work, many historic work items such as SPUD, PLUS, etc. have been proposed. It has been tried to be clarified that APN focuses
on the network layer and limited domains. Concerns on the security and privacy issues also have been proposed many times about the work. It also
has been tried to be clarified that in the trustable limited domains the security and privacy issues can be under control. These are the reasons why APN
work is based in the RTG area instead of ART/TSV areas.

But because of too much historic work to be clarified and its proposing the cross-area discussion for which RTG/APP/TSV/INT/SEC/IRTF are involved, it is
necessary to have more discussion to clarify the scope and work items for APN. We wish the mailing list would be helpful to the work and promoting the
cross-area communication to understand each other better.

You can get yourself up to speed with our discussions so far by seeing the materials at < https://github.com/APN-Community/>gt;, especially the materials
From the virtual IETF 108  APN side meeting at < https://github.com/APN-Community/IETF108-Side-Meeting-APN>gt;. This link also gives you pointers to
some of the relevant Internet-Drafts.

Over the next few weeks we will try to guide discussion by introducing some questions for debate. But please also raise your own issues and concerns
and contribute to the exchanges on this list.

Look forwarding to have more fun discussion in the mailing list.


Best Regards,
Dan & Zhenbin


_______________________________________________
Architecture-discuss mailing list
Architecture-discuss@ietf.org<mailto:Architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss