Re: [bcause] Inter SDO relationship considerations

Gregory Dalle <gdalle@juniper.net> Fri, 29 March 2019 12:31 UTC

Return-Path: <gdalle@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: bcause@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bcause@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF943120299 for <bcause@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 05:31:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.85
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.85 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.85, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 OyPIgW9N4xrh for <bcause@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 05:30:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com [208.84.65.16]) (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 EA7C4120294 for <bcause@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 05:30:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108156.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x2TCOjSE020901; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 05:30:51 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=p7EkMP9zKZhyrf+PkkHCw6TdrDXWagE7pEOom3jULjc=; b=dA9zyW6tEHzho7iZ0vrp1TliX6r3VpsZhYC0sX6vLltgkABSjlDH6ro9hs38JT1bhxZ/ piznUA37KpcfIYLMQB4LE0KQk5q6R3/BB5sKLqKAL8vNx6jIT+BDM9s8Qr1vB2bNwP+v fhgG2oB9z406Ut8bsHW5EVgQs18lI0JdPOboT9Gze5ADUyD8M//H79EOchl2sKNx8TdK fn0u3O3aFnk41QqrPhEp3nDfMzMYTx9FBe90YrFbKsO0pHBn9a4Fq5KJxEGdtOimcNc0 UCnqMw85xnhCUNXP257o6zeyMOwalQmooVBgu+ainsytnPuHyinB3HFeKsC5cQgKHpoU Vg==
Received: from nam02-sn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02lp2058.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.36.58]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2rhhwf0567-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 29 Mar 2019 05:30:50 -0700
Received: from MWHPR05MB3360.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.175.145) by MWHPR05MB3661.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.175.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1771.6; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:30:48 +0000
Received: from MWHPR05MB3360.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::9895:5636:5403:b39d]) by MWHPR05MB3360.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::9895:5636:5403:b39d%4]) with mapi id 15.20.1771.006; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:30:48 +0000
From: Gregory Dalle <gdalle@juniper.net>
To: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
CC: David Sinicrope <david.sinicrope@ericsson.com>, "bcause@ietf.org" <bcause@ietf.org>, "trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch" <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Thread-Topic: [bcause] Inter SDO relationship considerations
Thread-Index: AQHU5hNlwNsTm5pFFU6Uujiowsy9ZKYiYr4AgAAUg/+AAAvBgIAAB1Ce
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:30:47 +0000
Message-ID: <B12D6AAE-693C-4FAA-A2B5-028D71F77E96@juniper.net>
References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E11FA36@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> 0484FBCE-34ED-432A-90F9-A054D9412F85, <987A987E-1667-424D-BAC8-7DF518E32735@ericsson.com>, 1DBED2D7-4A4C-4549-8EAC-C2C7A29EDA88, <1E3BA1F7-39B2-40CE-8129-32891959AE77@juniper.net>, B4498FEF-9E69-481C-8C7C-BF3FD471CF5E
In-Reply-To: B4498FEF-9E69-481C-8C7C-BF3FD471CF5E
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [2601:182:cd00:2829:f4e0:4443:d7e5:30ce]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 519f45be-5fda-45d4-e376-08d6b4425f73
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(5600127)(711020)(4605104)(4618075)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:MWHPR05MB3661;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MWHPR05MB3661:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MWHPR05MB36611271F700E741E15F75A7D35A0@MWHPR05MB3661.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 0991CAB7B3
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(136003)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(396003)(366004)(31014005)(199004)(189003)(106356001)(105586002)(486006)(46003)(6116002)(606006)(2906002)(54906003)(36756003)(25786009)(71190400001)(71200400001)(86362001)(83716004)(7736002)(97736004)(4326008)(316002)(76176011)(6506007)(8936002)(229853002)(14454004)(186003)(82746002)(6486002)(478600001)(53546011)(6246003)(81166006)(81156014)(102836004)(6916009)(5660300002)(53936002)(966005)(6436002)(99286004)(8676002)(54896002)(6306002)(6512007)(33656002)(256004)(476003)(68736007)(11346002)(236005)(2616005)(446003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:MWHPR05MB3661; H:MWHPR05MB3360.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: XszxFLjQIUBPOzAMuv1jevrdCISfWbWtVSHWJDtkk1qoNl4zEATLO7IpeQFkorSRFniy8jwV9EaTYnpoEUTt0CHHmJO2SOGl4LOsbCSGGVVzoSQksRkSS2H8bXdDMVOTE2UVYH1zwwNkHTZqcERcvBgb1JiDHpKUKuYd0l7hyklpNdr4clNYxGXMkPdUN7iswMCzbLMcxIjnmNkOoHZu5kxHn/Dh7/fFQssEhm0mmxUCSJaES+awEfYTUgs/7ixP8saLQ8dxustr6roDAQ9ZJtYGfVcVdNByvNN2cK/HD98mZK1M5mTrYVRsKcT53Hrv1Bb9cVnTXnHRh+q/HAMebT7UEX9QRkRq8vxhYrYugT8xdGlGmVzcgHShDBCFT9vUWW6l88aUyCw+2oHUkXBXa6n+7ECY8g1EsJIkI9pj500=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B12D6AAE693C4FAAA2B5028D71F77E96junipernet_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 519f45be-5fda-45d4-e376-08d6b4425f73
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Mar 2019 12:30:48.0094 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR05MB3661
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-03-29_07:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1903290090
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bcause/_93t2bQ_OTVi6PKyvDFOz5Iqqak>
Subject: Re: [bcause] Inter SDO relationship considerations
X-BeenThere: bcause@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bcause.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bcause>, <mailto:bcause-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bcause/>
List-Post: <mailto:bcause@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bcause-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bcause>, <mailto:bcause-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:31:03 -0000

Mach,

Current issue of WT-459 is posted. Have a look at the scope section. Protocol definition is in scope, protocol design is not in scope. Nothing new. Feel free to unicast me if you are still confused.

Greg


On Mar 29, 2019, at 8:04 AM, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com<mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com>> wrote:

Hi Greg,

Let's put FMC, WT-458, aside, since it is not in the scope.

As for DBNG,WT-459, AFAIK, it just focuses on architecture, requirements, use cases. CUPS protocol definition for BNG is not in the scope.

Let's do not confuse the situation again and again.

Best regards,
Mach
发件人:Gregory Dalle <gdalle@juniper.net<mailto:gdalle@juniper.net>>
收件人:Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com<mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com>>
抄 送:David Sinicrope <david.sinicrope@ericsson.com<mailto:david.sinicrope@ericsson.com>>;bcause@ietf.org<mailto:bcause@ietf.org> <bcause@ietf.org<mailto:bcause@ietf.org>>;trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch<mailto:trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch<mailto:trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch>>
时间:2019-03-29 12:22:46
主 题:Re: [bcause] Inter SDO relationship considerations

Mach, it would overlap. BBF is addressing CUPS both for BNG (WT-459) and CUPS for FMC (WT-458), as described in liaisons.

Greg

On Mar 29, 2019, at 6:09 AM, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com<mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com>> wrote:

I think your statement is not true, there is no overlap
. As one of the proponents, I am sure that the CUSP is only targeting to address CMCC's fixed BNG CUPS  requirements.

Best regards,
Mach
发件人:David Sinicrope <david.sinicrope@ericsson.com<mailto:david.sinicrope@ericsson.com>>
收件人:bcause@ietf.org<mailto:bcause@ietf.org> <bcause@ietf.org<mailto:bcause@ietf.org>>
抄 送:trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch<mailto:trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch<mailto:trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch>>
时间:2019-03-29 10:40:16
主 题:[bcause] Inter SDO relationship considerations

(IETF Liaison Manager to BBF hat on)

The statements on this list, especially those to the effect that CUSP work in the IETF would not exclude FMC, indicate that there is high potential (and intent?) that both the BBF and the IETF would be working on two competing solutions, i.e., two different solutions competing for the same problem.

The two organizations pursuing competing solutions creates an inherent strain on the inter SDO relationship, that to this point has been coordinated, cooperative and cordial.

Further, given the indications in the liaisons from BBF that they intend to work cooperatively with 3GPP, should they decide to pursue PFCP as a solution, would then potentially put IETF in competition with 3GPP as well.

Introducing this inter-SDO strain has potential impacts beyond this immediate bcause issue to other work between the organizations.

I would ask the participants and ADs to please consider these potential issues in your deliberations.

Thank-you,
Dave

--
bcause mailing list
bcause@ietf.org<mailto:bcause@ietf.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_bcause&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=VhX0NAIO1d7yQxdURKFPY59GAxttnQcfkn45tfRnREs&m=JC3Qb6i8mCuJ1qoJ8V-GimcEg54-mMyrB33kAH77u5s&s=rParcq-0T3mErgJ0LkEVsN2Re1I49f7UqUi1l9dvxnU&e=