Re: [Casm] Which interfaces does CASM plan on standardizing?

Hi Chongfeng,
> Hi,  Carpenter，
>
> It is nice to receive your comments.　
>
> CASM and ANIMA differ with each otherin the following aspects.
>
> Firstly, ANIMA is a self-managing in
> AUTONOMIC networking environment, the configurations to network elements
> are mainly done by the network elements themselves. while in CASM, in order 
>
> to make the task easier, we propose the use centralizedserver or platform to do 
>
> the configuration task, of course, the server may be distributed physically. 
>
>
>
> Secondly, they have different use case, more the 3
> years ago, I had a long talk with Dr. Jiang Sheng in Beijing, and propose
> that the IP RAN may be a suitable use case to ANIMA, although the name
> didn't exist yet.  the primary use case for CASM is the address pool
> configuration for broadband IP network, CT has implemented the whole system 
>
> based on the current CASM　dratfs, and 3 vendors have joined the field test 
>
> last year. The field trial prove this approach can solve the issues we
> are concernd with.
>
> The detailed description of the interface is shown in,
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-yang/
3 vendor implementations. Great. That's a lot of experience.
So the end goal is to standardize this 
draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-yang draft?
You had some support for this in OPSAWG for a WG document, if I recall 
correctly...
Or maybe you learned from this development experience?

Regards, Benoit

>
>
> Thank you!
>
> Chongfeng
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> xiechf.bri@chinatelecom.cn
>
>     *发件人：* Brian E Carpenter <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
>     *发送时间：* 2017-02-28 07:54
>     *收件人：* Xie Chongfeng <mailto:xiechf.bri@chinatelecom.cn>;
>     marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca <mailto:marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>;
>     bclaise <mailto:bclaise@cisco.com>; CASM@ietf.org
>     <mailto:CASM@ietf.org>
>     *抄送：* lichen.bri@chinatelecom.cn
>     <mailto:lichen.bri@chinatelecom.cn>; 'Liushucheng (Will)'
>     <mailto:liushucheng@huawei.com>; wanghn.bri@chinatelecom.cn
>     <mailto:wanghn.bri@chinatelecom.cn>;
>     draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management
>     <mailto:draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management@ietf.org>
>     *主题：* Re: [Casm] Which interfaces does CASM plan on standardizing?
>     Hi Chongfeng,
>     > Network operation team needs configure manaually IP address pool
>     in each
>     > BRAS/vBRAS
>     Obviously that is a hopeless task. That's exactly why this is one
>     of the test cases for ANIMA. So can you please comment on the
>     level of detail needed in that interface? Is it similar to
>     https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-02#section-6.1
>     That is an example for an IPRAN operator.
>     Note, I'm not asking about technical details - just about the
>     level of abstraction.
>     Regards
>        Brian Carpenter
>     On 16/02/2017 03:09, Xie Chongfeng wrote:
>     >
>     > Hi，Benoit and all,
>     >
>     > This subject was originally raised by China Telecom, our use
>     case is clear and straightforward.  In CT's network, there are
>     tens of thousands of BRAS equipments，which are the major gateway
>     to the broadband users. When the vBRAS was introduced, the volume
>     will be even higher. Network operation team needs configure
>     manaually IP address pool in each
>     > BRAS/vBRAS, which are time-consuming and low -efficient. Can
>     DHCP solve this problem? The answer is NO, since DHCP deals with
>     address allocation for end users.
>     >
>     > In order to autimate the configuration process and improve the
>     IP adress usage, a centralized address pool managment approach may
>     be more reasonable. We discucssed with verdors and carriers, we
>     found that there have been some proprioritary inplementations,
>     they differ in the south-bound interface, so  we propose to
>     standardize the south-bound interface in the early stage, which
>     will benefit to all the players.
>     >
>     > Since the requirements are pressing to CT, we begun the filed
>     trial last year and 3 vendors have implementated the interface
>     defined in draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-yang, luckily
>     they all passed the field test by our joint efforts.
>     >
>     > As mentioned in other drafts of CASM, the address management
>     capability will be  opened to other applications,such as SDN and
>     Cloud , the  north-bound interface will be standanized as well.
>     >
>     > Of course, in order to define the interface and its relatvie
>     workflow, a unified framwork or architecture will need to be
>     defined in advance.
>     >
>     > Thank you!
>     >
>     > Chongfeng Xie
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > xiechf.bri@chinatelecom.cn
>     >
>     > From: Marc Blanchet
>     > Date: 2017-02-14 20:24
>     > To: Rakesh Kumar
>     > CC: Liushucheng; Xie Chongfeng
>     > Subject: Re: IPAM design from microsoft
>     > will look into it. were you able to get Bloomsberg or else to
>     support the work?
>     > Marc.
>     > On 14 Feb 2017, at 6:57, Rakesh Kumar wrote:
>     > HI,
>     >
>     > I found a very good document on the web from Microsoft about
>     IPAM. This is good document that explains some of the concept we
>     have listed in the drafts.
>     > I thought, you guys might want to take a look at this for your
>     reference.
>     >
>     > Thanks & Regards
>     > Rakesh
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > CASM mailing list
>     > CASM@ietf.org
>     > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm
>     >
>