Re: [CCAMP] Interim discussions on OTN slicing
Aihua Guo <aihuaguo.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 23 February 2022 17:17 UTC
Return-Path: <aihuaguo.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E27B3A1140;
Wed, 23 Feb 2022 09:17:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
header.d=gmail.com
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 dlwHirp5cyKK; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 09:17:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi1-x235.google.com (mail-oi1-x235.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::235])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DBA03A0D44;
Wed, 23 Feb 2022 09:17:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi1-x235.google.com with SMTP id j2so19066191oie.7;
Wed, 23 Feb 2022 09:17:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=Fz8EwepMFHUV6eXHirtvFeX+h084N8iGKxsjcy6t6pg=;
b=aX8n4pmUikMw92VKeZaWNn88wNTyQvckutjm9165m69bHYIwZcVXjcNlhoT6co0zbe
t9LdMYIFMFB68jCUxd9mWIe5rx/mcdlsxwFiuSvoV2oYNoNxLoF6gjGQlqX0JZ40fUg4
UCDTsPNZJ9RMDlhqUmU8Za7xNFROYnYWBdG4Wu6rcJzZxy8of0dE0BIZ7hRtkqpoEcOc
KpDYLqG8bz9SBBjWfPTIJHAhlxEqfosIIZ2XOlUcMj++M/Vn4iYlIGuEnQnYwV2Vewfx
V/kzVronSDo0vFwEw+wcwDmDIPAyIT59OQv4CVeS/9XkN7hb8WioGSudpR7V1HdXNkJd
yDIQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=Fz8EwepMFHUV6eXHirtvFeX+h084N8iGKxsjcy6t6pg=;
b=XgNxZxx7paaJsOD3eXasL7G9pUWL0arqTquSLXKRrs1aHcQu/FT18zMvYCzbJGN9s/
qFv0vvMgWKhoBxKx07m0qXrlrEP86eENXHLXr4xwKLMVSYyHAMisqCoptHgGUr+JN2Nm
hbJHFwdF3YioUF/75knIwOg8LSfw+VmNStPIRWALzZd06xfG/2PGile0HB9GZqUwjbYQ
mGZjJq/szE0qweGnGNhk9TfAcapoSYTtVlfb9aBBawRtqtljFof/vgPIwYY3ih1+9Adz
eB3aMTvfZK5uDM04jziM631afItpH+rCm26PodgT6fc/PRkw4vg6wvQg3Vq8gOUlcdXq
vKeQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ky+3pNZ9vEHbWfxuxbjzE6FxAjjbSVQ7CgoIUrutmdK4hctkU
641K8kgU8OwIkNZQRbQolzPLY2uXNYLDZwqajg4eyBGM
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzET0KqlDug+HwwPj4LT7Z+iz+qPk9yuLUgq7MY43riQwJuyjpFyeIJDhjbHqPkI8rcBUUxN0JvXPFP74mMKSU=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1383:b0:2d5:1f4b:99cc with SMTP id
c3-20020a056808138300b002d51f4b99ccmr379516oiw.246.1645636626296; Wed, 23 Feb
2022 09:17:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Aihua Guo <aihuaguo.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 12:16:48 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFS+G6Tf8WhJgZTKoCms-g1D0_y5T0Mx4Ta5VGYQdarpNje_Jg@mail.gmail.com>
To: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>, ccamp-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008a320005d8b2a2f0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/2QOCoPAazzro_oFshPZ1GNdZSso>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Interim discussions on OTN slicing
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>,
<mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>,
<mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 17:17:11 -0000
Hi CCAMPers, Chairs,
Thank you for organizing and participating in the interim meeting for OTN
slicing. We have had some further discussions on the weekly calls and here
are the main points we draw from those discussions.
- There is significant interest from the WG to progress the work for OTN
slicing.
- Most people believe the work for OTN slicing is consistent with the
TEAS NS framework and is supported by the use cases described in the IETF
NS framework as well as in this draft.
- Most of the questions raised in the interim are not specific to OTN
slicing but are more fundamental towards TEAS network slicing. The
agreement from the interim, to our understanding, is to raise those
questions to TEAS for addressing.
- Since TEAS has already made the consensus to work on network slicing
defined by the IETF NS framework, we think it is more appropriate for
people who have concerns to challenge TEAS, as an individual, on those
fundamental decisions. If TEAS decides to change the terms and scope on
network slicing, then OTN slicing will follow suit and update accordingly.
Therefore, in our view a liaison to TEAS may not be needed at this
point. However, if the chairs consider so then we suggest to confirm that
our view is correctly aligned with the current TEAS work on network
slicing. Specifically,
- Realization of slicing is not limited only to some specific
technologies but also others such as OTN
- The terms and modeling structure are aligned with the definition in
IETF network slicing
Thanks,
Aihua (on behalf of the co-authors)
- Re: [CCAMP] Interim discussions on OTN slicing Aihua Guo
- Re: [CCAMP] Interim discussions on OTN slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [CCAMP] Interim discussions on OTN slicing Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [CCAMP] Interim discussions on OTN slicing Igor Bryskin