[bess] Request for review : L2VPN service model

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 20 November 2017 12:07 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D48F129564 for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 04:07:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.619
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.619 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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 47z-Du6113mK for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 04:07:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6361112954C for <bess@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 04:07:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id vAKC7h6W026826 for <bess@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:07:43 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (116.133.112.87.dyn.plus.net [87.112.133.116]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id vAKC7gRC026797 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <bess@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:07:43 GMT
Reply-To: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: <bess@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:07:40 -0000
Message-ID: <19f101d361f8$2aff6280$80fe2780$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdNh9uaxXDUA535WTyibRsHG0gZIyQ==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1679-8.1.0.1062-23476.006
X-TM-AS-Result: No--10.774-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--10.774-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: D4BgP5Q0mLDm2Ia5KlNDU7a0rLOn7IyWBgA+oehWZhEAIXlMppp3X6+2 iUhw8uh43S0syjcxU66l+/2BbC+On/QPRH4blNMcGAZMT5SLmAlA8I/PJy4EUzCmUYns3FLTKN+ mPLZGXSjSxAD4g+xCFL66kgsguhNCvtzYfLMLCirKl4yJoI+fGwkN8Uvsy+nth5Q1ArtCPlz2wu +LPoaXV3vdB58C48/WCFM6nYoR6ZjYMEqhScrQBcikxLAkSHclnophrTcsI7abKItl61J/ycnjL TA/UDoAxpQ77C1A1tqOhzOa6g8KraGY91VPI0B8JNYB0pZFpDf8+gn2a/zcuc6SqbrNnRYotzol rrdhKzM=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/k6b1AYT726tnKAp4ONdHZncOym4>
Subject: [bess] Request for review : L2VPN service model
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:07:48 -0000

Hi,

As I said at the mic in Singapore, the L2VPN service model
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2sm-l2vpn-service-model/) is
getting close to WG last call (probably just one revision and a YANG review
first) and would really benefit from review.

Recall that this model is not a device model and is not about how a VPN is
implemented or realized in a network, but is about how the VPN service is
discussed between a service provider and their customer.

In view of this, review from three perspectives would be particularly useful:
- customers (e.g., enterprises) to let us know that the description of the
   service is how you would request a service
- service providers to let us know if the model fits with how you describe
   the services you sell
- implementers of management systems to understand that whether they
   could map from the service description to the network configuration that
   is needed to operate the VPN.

Of course, all other reviews are also welcome.

Please send comments to the L2SM list (not this list!).

Thanks,
Adrian (L2SM co-chair)