IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bcause] Inter SDO relationship considerations

Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> Fri, 29 March 2019 12:04 UTC

Return-Path: <mach.chen@huawei.com>
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 35650120431 for <bcause@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 05:04:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.371
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.371 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, INVALID_MSGID=0.568, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 KHS0MzH2Zw6i for <bcause@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 05:04:45 -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 9D1C61202C3 for <bcause@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 05:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 61EF96C4AB870BB663B8; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:04:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.50) by lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:04:41 +0000
Received: from DGGEML510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.190]) by dggeml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.3.17.50]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 20:04:38 +0800
From: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
To: Gregory Dalle <gdalle@juniper.net>
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: AQHU5hNqkh3JEXIhe0KL6C9yKWuixqYiYr7A//+OZ4CAAJHdiA==
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 12:04:37 +0000
Message-ID: B4498FEF-9E69-481C-8C7C-BF3FD471CF5E
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>
In-Reply-To: <1E3BA1F7-39B2-40CE-8129-32891959AE77@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B4498FEF9E69481C8C7CBF3FD471CF5E_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bcause/ibWIh5R4YqCNlomYOmvDq6e0fdU>
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 12:04:57 -0000

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>
收件人：Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
抄 送：David Sinicrope <david.sinicrope@ericsson.com>;bcause@ietf.org <bcause@ietf.org>;trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch <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=

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email