Re: [Casm] New Version Notification for draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00.txt

["Marc Blanchet" <[e-mail]>]

On 8 Feb 2017, at 8:51, Xie Chongfeng wrote:

> One of the basic requirments of centralized address management is that 
> the mechanism shouled be aligned with the routing system, for 
> instance, when one address block is allocated to an network equiment, 
> the routing entry correspondent to this address block will be 
> broadcasted accordingly, otherwise, the network will not work 
> correctly.

well, yes. but that route injection can be done by the network equipment 
into the routing realm. So in this case, the route injection is not 
centralized per se.

Marc.

> Similarly,when one address block is withdrawl from an given network 
> equipment, the routing entry will be withdrawl as well.
>
> Chongfeng Xie
>
>
>
> [e-mail]
>
> From: Rakesh Kumar
> Date: 2017-02-06 06:02
> To: Xie Chongfeng; 'Liushucheng (Will)'; [e-mail]
> CC: [e-mail]; ian.farrer; normen.kowalewski; Rakesh Kumar
> Subject: Re: [Casm] New Version Notification for 
> draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00.txt
> Hi Dr Xie, Will
>
> We put two drafts based on earlier discussions.
>
> 1.       
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kumar-casm-problem-and-use-cases-00 
> : Basically draft identifies the traditional  IP address management 
> tools (proprietary and open source) and what they lack. I think, 
> almost every network deployment would need some sort of address 
> management so talked about use-cases not from deployment but from 
> implementation perspective. Basically approach taken in this draft 
> regarding problem and use-cases is a bit different than 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xie-ps-centralized-address-management.
> 2.       
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kumar-casm-requirements-and-framework-00 
> : We have listed a set of requirement from a modern address management 
> system that can be used for diverse set of deployments (Data Center, 
> Metro Access, BNG, 3GPP, Enterprise branch & campus etc.). We have 
> also specified an architecture framework to define and develop 
> “CASM”.
>
> In summary, at top level this work looks similar to the earlier one 
> but there are differences in approaches.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Rakesh
>
> From: Xie Chongfeng <[e-mail]>
> Date: Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 6:35 PM
> To: Rakesh Kumar <[e-mail]>, "'Liushucheng (Will)'" 
> <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" 
> <[e-mail]>
> Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "ian.farrer" 
> <[e-mail]>, "normen.kowalewski" 
> <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Re: [Casm] New Version Notification for 
> draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00.txt
>
>
> Yes, I agree to  combine all ideas into one set of drafts to push 
> forward this work.
>
> BUT  I didn't find any major difference between CASM and the old 
> drafts, major use cases of centralized address management has been 
> considered in the old PS draft 
> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xie-ps-centralized-address-management/), 
> including the DNS and NAT. CT put forward the use case of address 
> management in metro network,  Ian and norman of DT raised the case of 
> address management for OpenStack, OSS,etc.
>
> So, I think it is necessary to clarify the relationship of these 
> drafts. Thank you!
>
> Chongfeng
>
>
>
> [e-mail]
>
> From: Rakesh Kumar
> Date: 2017-02-03 14:37
> To: Liushucheng (Will); Marc Blanchet; Xie Chongfeng
> CC: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Casm] New Version Notification for 
> draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00.txt
> Hi Will,
>
> The draft we wrote was based on the slide set we had presented 
> earlier, that details a comprehensive approach to address management 
> including with other address services such as DNS and NAT. We have 
> also introduced the concept of interfaces based on user requirements.
>
> I think, it would be good idea to combine all ideas into one set of 
> drafts.
>
> I think, CASM would also be useful for mining data for security 
> related analytics.
>
> Thanks
> Rakesh
>
> On 2/2/17, 10:26 PM, "CASM on behalf of Liushucheng (Will)" 
> <[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>     Hi Rakesh,
>
>     Many thanks for your efforts!
>
>     No worries. Let's review and update in next version. And maybe 
> another online meeting in next week.
>
>     Btw, there are also some old work on this area as we discussed:
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xie-ps-centralized-address-management/
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-arch/
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-yang/
>
>     Would you please let the audience know about the differences 
> between new ones and old ones?
>
>     Regards,
>     Will (LIU Shucheng)
>
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: CASM [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Marc 
> Blanchet
>     Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 9:02 PM
>     To: Rakesh Kumar <[e-mail]>
>     Cc: [e-mail]
>     Subject: Re: [Casm] New Version Notification for 
> draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00.txt
>
>     On 30 Jan 2017, at 1:43, Rakesh Kumar wrote:
>
>     > It looks like we messed up on the name. My mistake.
>     >
>     > It should have been
>     > “draft-kumar-casm-requirements-and-framework-00” instead of
>     > “draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00”.
>     > Is there a way to correct it?
>
>     yeah. no big deal. we shall fix it for the new rev.
>
>     Marc.
>
>     >
>     > Thanks
>     > Rakesh
>     >
>     > On 1/29/17, 8:03 PM, "CASM on behalf of Rakesh Kumar"
>     > <[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> wrote:
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >     On 1/29/17, 7:53 PM, "[e-mail]"
>     > <[e-mail]> wrote:
>     >
>     >
>     >         A new version of I-D,
>     > draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00.txt
>     >         has been successfully submitted by Marc Blanchet and 
> posted to
>     > the
>     >         IETF repository.
>     >
>     >         Name: draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework
>     >         Revision: 00
>     >         Title: Centralized Address Space Management(CASM)
>     > Requirements and Framework
>     >         Document date: 2017-01-29
>     >         Group: Individual Submission
>     >         Pages: 8
>     >         URL:
>     > 
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00.txt
>     >         Status:
>     > 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework/
>     >         Htmlized:
>     > 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kumar-requirements-and-framework-00
>     >
>     >
>     >         Abstract:
>     >            The organizations use IP Address Space Management 
> (IPAM)
>     > tools to
>     >            manage their IP address space, often with proprietary
>     > database and
>     >            interfaces.  This document describes evolution of 
> IPAM into
>     > a
>     >            standardized interfaces for centralized management of 
> IP
>     > addresses.
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >         Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from 
> the time
>     > of submission
>     >         until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>     > tools.ietf.org.
>     >
>     >         The IETF Secretariat
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >     _______________________________________________
>     >     CASM mailing list
>     >     [e-mail]
>     >     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > CASM mailing list
>     > [e-mail]
>     > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     CASM mailing list
>     [e-mail]
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm
>     _______________________________________________
>     CASM mailing list
>     [e-mail]
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm