[Cats] Re: What's next for CATS? Vienna and beyond

[Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jing,

 

[snip]

 

There are some additional groundwork I-Ds on security, OAM, data models.

a. draft-wang-cats-security-considerations

b. draft-fu-cats-oam-fw

c. draft-yl-cats-data-model

 

[Jing] Do we need to specify a YANG model for the northbound interface here?

 

[AF] I wonder if you could help me understand the positioning of an NBI in the context of figure 2 of draft-ietf-cats-framework.

Which components would implementing the model? Where would it be consumed?

 

[snip]

 

The chairs also think that two protocol applicability documents are maturing

well.

d. draft-yxl-cats-protocols-applicability

e. draft-dunbar-cats-5g-metadata-applicability

 

[Jing] Do we need to include an applicability description for the YANG model here?

 

[AF] Possibly, although maybe not. Where we are talking about how to use existing protocols for enable CATS, the need for an applicability draft is clear. With a new YANG model (specific to CATS) I might expect that draft to describe its own applicability. However, it is possible that many different (including existing) YANG models are needed to manage and operate a CATS system – in that case and applicability draft could be useful.


[snip]

 

People also seem to be interested in discussing "stretch use cases", but the

chairs think that we need to see CATS working before we get too excited

about specialist applicability.

 

[Jing] CATS supports potential extended use cases, and we would appreciate your attention to this area.

 

[AF] Well, of course, everyone should write and discuss the drafts that interest them. I think what the chairs are trying to indicate is that they will be giving priority to the core CATS work and would love to hear about implementations.

 

Best,

Adrian