Re: [CCAMP] Next steps on overlay

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Mon, 28 January 2013 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 BB8B321F8871 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:50:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.466
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.466 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.199, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zGrSiqKV2q2W for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:50:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com [67.222.54.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D27E121F87FA for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:50:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 5694 invoked by uid 0); 28 Jan 2013 16:49:49 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by cpoproxy3.bluehost.com with SMTP; 28 Jan 2013 16:49:49 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=a6Z8G8FETLo13CGqrz6J6h5x+gd4ySXzsVMzyYb4f44=; b=SsjeYnWzLm/iQm+7KknqGk2nEjm1L2r+NV4OMZG6tFtgtrdKZg5c1mmGs16cbvKvw34sxgdqIc7c2PSDimUKBe7NuDScmN4KPOps6q4QbzWpSGepvSlC2+SOINzBZX0G;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:38069 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1Tzru1-0001B6-3z; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:49:49 -0700
Message-ID: <5106AC38.2010106@labn.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:50:00 -0500
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
References: <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C8258164@MISOUT7MSGUSR9O.ITServices.sbc.com> <4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE48074083@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE48074083@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Next steps on overlay
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:50:14 -0000

Daniele,
	
Much thanks for the summary. I look forward to the revised document.

WRT
> Most of its content, wrt the Virtual Links advertisement model
> (former E-NNI) has already been widely explained by Igor and Lou,

I think you give me too much credit.  Looking at the archive, the
majority of the comments/discussion were from/with others.  I hope that
their comments are incorporated as well.

Lou
(pick whichever hat you want!)

On 1/28/2013 11:29 AM, Daniele Ceccarelli wrote:
> Deborah, all,
>  
> agree that it's time to sum up.
>  
> As agreed in Atlanta draft-many-ccamp-gmpls-overlay-model
> <http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-many-ccamp-gmpls-overlay-model-01.txt> will
> be updated in the next days so to reflect the discussions of the last
> months on the list and will try to reflect all the topics where there is
> no consensus and, if available, list all the proposed alternatives.
>  
> Basically:
>  
> - The overall doc will reflect my latest summary (v2) including the
> following comments basically from Lou and Igor.
> - The terminology part will be based at the time being on VPNs (but open
> to be modified if needed)
> - Use cases: will try to cover the ones in the E-NNI and L1VPN drafts.
> If more of them are needed please contact me.
> - Description of the different advertisement models and service models.
> Basically we are defining a general topology service model so that
> existing VPN service models are particular cases of it.
> - Relationship with MLN/MRN: the overlay interfaces does not necessarily
> need to be placed on a link between different technology domains (e.g.
> IP and WSON) but could be placed also withing the same NE between two
> layer of the same technology (e.g. an OTN deployment where the ODU3
> layer is managed as a provided network providing connectivity between
> ODU2s which form the client network).
>  
> In addition, wrt latest discussion on Additional Overlay Protocol
> Extensions i think that's meat for the second document on the
> advertisement, where for each of them we need to say which info is
> needed AND NOT HOW IT ENCODED OR TRANSPORTED. This final part will be
> addressed in the third document dedicated to protocol extensions (this
> was the agreement in Atlanta and i think there is no reason to move from
> that).
>  
> It is definitely too early to move to doc #3 but we could start working
> on #2. Most of its content, wrt the Virtual Links advertisement model
> (former E-NNI) has already been widely explained by Igor and Lou, which
> seem to disagree on HOW to carry the info but not on WHICH of them are
> needed.
>  
> BR
> Daniele
>  
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] *On
> Behalf Of *BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
> *Sent:* giovedì 24 gennaio 2013 21.04
> *To:* ccamp@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [CCAMP] Next steps on overlay
> 
>     CCAMP,
>      
>     There’s been quite a bit of discussion on the list, we’d like to see
>     progress on this topic. Perhaps we’ve reached the point where it’s
>     time to update/author drafts to reflect current positions. This can
>     either be done in one document or in multiple (authors’ choice).
>      
>     We also note that multiple viewpoints on how overlays may be
>     deployed/operated have been discussed. We suggest that documenting
>     these use cases, including data plane and control plane
>     relationships/boundaries, would be helpful.
>      
>     Thanks,
>     Deborah and Lou
>     CCAMP Chairs
>      
>      
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
>