Re: [Apn] Further revised draft Charter

hsyu <hsyu@cfiec.net> Wed, 08 February 2023 06:16 UTC

Return-Path: <hsyu@cfiec.net>
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 A347EC1575A4; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 22:16:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.796
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NioyhvgWzlYn; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 22:16:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpbg156.qq.com (smtpbg156.qq.com [15.184.82.18]) (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 D3D30C1575A3; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 22:16:32 -0800 (PST)
X-QQ-mid: bizesmtp72t1675836985tk45m1y5
Received: from DESKTOP-3U2VLEE ( [60.247.14.2]) by bizesmtp.qq.com (ESMTP) with id ; Wed, 08 Feb 2023 14:16:10 +0800 (CST)
X-QQ-SSF: 00400000000000C0Z000000A0000000
X-QQ-FEAT: IByDngDI/kGSqSWoICyAYPoir2dkTE6KIN6Ht5yiEYtOnri9dfoJbr+yCwIRf gBqDbx5pZSbWhIGEpJ2k2UXeZlURzU5qYQQVDoLmZy78EuiJq4COHz3gZIk2/eWwGUoJDtd YVkL304IsOJntMWBag2eWe1SRNCT4EsDErzFRJDg4MDsxY52MmFqQndaBB5/hWSOIYUTrDI cZNNtNWRF2bBFrSlR0pOdagud+ZYk/apQG2Ogi30gn+6Nx+OztAy/V6YWDVdvS1HsZz7Nat QSLFJDK3J/ZDQ+Rpi+ucwLp0uvOD048KVpMmJBrD89ojdRnUt7tEv9+d/a2KpReh5wCRoUS 8cgVlSwb7TQQUOQrF1pkI7U7wODcuQGzeJ6uycGnAJ6e4jdMgzb0qZNxyT/VQ==
X-QQ-GoodBg: 2
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2023 14:14:47 +0800
From: hsyu <hsyu@cfiec.net>
To: "d3e3e3@gmail.com" <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Cc: "apn@ietf.org" <apn@ietf.org>, "apn-chairs@ietf.org" <apn-chairs@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <D1C931F7A55E50E3+ED20959E-9AFF-49A7-94A6-F27752DCDAC0@cfiec.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEG48+2jUO4cBERP93McoTLMsXvNOpYb2i3wsM7XMWKzsg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF4+nEFHcKBbc7J8v3yj_b6V1==4yUBOOhdazR2yrP75Gcd0mA@mail.gmail.com> <9CDE6B0E14A1EDEA+62D20F20-2ACF-412E-85DC-7DB362F77D68@cfiec.net> <CAF4+nEG48+2jUO4cBERP93McoTLMsXvNOpYb2i3wsM7XMWKzsg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MailMasterPC/4.17.9.1009 (Win10 19H2)
X-CUSTOM-MAIL-MASTER-SENT-ID: 20EE9837-CA1C-437F-861C-FCF940FAAD9E
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-QQ-SENDSIZE: 520
Feedback-ID: bizesmtp:cfiec.net:qybglogicsvr:qybglogicsvr2
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apn/yrquvZmOyUSJ6cYAlbQ_yxUYtoo>
Subject: Re: [Apn] Further revised draft Charter
X-BeenThere: apn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Wed, 08 Feb 2023 06:16:39 -0000

Hi, Donald, 

I appreciate your consideration of my suggestion. I have seen some practical requirements for APN to carry extra information on the email list, and I am eager to express my hope that the working group can be established as soon as possible. I am willing to participate in related work. 


---- Replied Message ----
Hi,

Thanks for your comments.

See below

On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 5:16 AM hsyu <hsyu@cfiec.net> wrote:

Hi, All

I have thoroughly reviewed the APN Chapter and all the responses. To Ted's concern, I wonder whether it is because the scope of the Charter is not clearly defined. The text in the Chapter states "A Common APNET FIELD will be added to Data Plane Packets at the Network Domain Ingress Edge and removed at the Domain Egress Edge." It's not clear whether the "Domain Ingress Edge" refers to a User Device or a Network Device. Similarly, it's unclear if the "Domain Egress Edge" is a device or network. Would clarifying the definition of the Domain boundaries help make the scope of the APN work more clear?

The intent was that the Domain Ingress Edge and Domain Egress edge be
devices under the control of the domain management. This should be
clarified in the Charter.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
d3e3e3@gmail.com

Haisheng Yu (Johnson)

Director of Prospective Technology Laboratory, China Future Internet Engineering Center
Researcher at Macau University of Science and Technology

---- Replied Message ----
From Donald Eastlake<d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date 1/18/2023 10:04
To <apn@ietf.org>
Cc <apn-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject [Apn] Further revised draft Charter
I've gotten some comments and I've re-read some of the AD DISCUSSES and comments. Based on that I've updated the draft Charter as attached.  Comments are welcome.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
d3e3e3@gmail.com

--
Apn mailing list
Apn@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apn