Re: [CCAMP] [Teas] Reply to ETSI communication on WIM

"Adrian Farrel" <> Sat, 14 December 2019 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51768120046; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 09:46:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.597
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BO5RhZMGuzlv; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 09:46:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48EDE1200C4; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 09:46:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id xBEHkfoH028765; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:46:41 GMT
Received: from (unknown []) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039EE2203B; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:46:41 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E20E12203A; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:46:40 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id xBEHkdGM006554 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:46:40 GMT
Reply-To: <>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <>
To: "'Daniele Ceccarelli'" <>, <>, "'CCAMP'" <>
Cc: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:46:37 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <015a01d5b2a6$6fefa7f0$4fcef7d0$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_015B_01D5B2A6.6FF218F0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQEgY1SIL6Ve9qZLURCPMOaXuB7HB6kkhhvQ
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-
X-TM-AS-Result: No--16.056-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--16.056-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Result: 10--16.056000-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: jFqw+1pFnMzeHQdXHwlQqnFPUrVDm6jtekMgTOQbVFsPnmQH7HRKM9Lu X2hj/M7Uwl3bWIapwcGH7/YaXrc5rFIeiyfGop1wSrSQG2AKa3P17lqbebntfZTEsxwAmHMKHR6 87uSBjUkzbGgSjUtst0DAzPFl8wDUDWDAsOE1531Q+S0N05fR+7p+dd7207HmhuUwwoGE6JRpik /9hPBw3Xi6xWxpWb062KgZstYuieG3D6KvZM+Iir1Zdxpk/SkcNGzPoDPB/1JsD+L2/zElxlaGr AOmqLgeja3rP9/YOUtBsmrsRbv//V0ieHN50/kHtT4jIeGRd/WeKBD/0uNkNlhs8uimgHNCNKxk YxBHiPviPZMOJ3412BrCM7SLaGIq8mlg3ZRQcwcc7HVV16v/Sy0RMxktQHuWuJUaWudkSGMUzad NPrunh27AJo3IM2Pwf5wxH/jBdbEGtA/+qkCcvey7jhAGPQakKVrLOZD1BXQjlnxOIeMfMJyqEw wq12HBqIcFxNT+Zbo62JOavxjx6vm4Dg5ro8fbB0c2kG7Gs6ikdO7TbvbzY1Rmu5xQxb92o20o7 eOKI0t/reCxlmmh9LRt248caF7w4O424N0X9KBJQAV6arsHZd9WrDP4LKdpGA7uwIZNHQ1cX89d DrF4+YmZnwWWIBq/vy1D537721dh9/cDmdaORiH9ExNVXbjbGfESeH6pl4ZHZg0gWH5yUdo4FZo SpQ8YW7N2eg6SyXR1v1JmwfUhbOYhgmzrNTBrJDuWzfvz/Mddxx6WRf+5sIxRWJphhsrcTXOj1X BAu3ApTvNzKFoS2tYHxVr9gN7RblRUOPmdAoaeAiCmPx4NwGmRqNBHmBvevqq8s2MNhPDPPeN6H N6d7LqN6SfkrETcp6RP6ZqDDECLZAVphLW/bXkguuQorcgMoy4DWs5stek0jaw+pgvlClJ+xame pOh+FP2tWZfyeUZ+3BndfXUhXQ==
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] [Teas] Reply to ETSI communication on WIM
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:46:47 -0000



I like that a lot.



From: Teas <> On Behalf Of Daniele Ceccarelli
Sent: 14 December 2019 17:28
To:; CCAMP ( <>
Subject: [Teas] Reply to ETSI communication on WIM


TEAS, CCAMP, chairs,


I tried to put together a  first draft of the reply to the ETSI

I would suggest to include the OPSA WG since the reply includes also the
service and network models defined there. 

Here is a preliminary proposal:


The IETF TEAS and CCAMP working groups would like to thank the ETSI ISG NFV
for notifying the start of the work on multi-site connectivity services. We
acknowledge the commonalities between the WIM infrastructure manager
interfaces and the ACTN ones, in particular the CMI (CSC-MDSC) interface.
Our understanding is that the scope of the WIM interfaces is not limited to
the management of the underlay Traffic Engineered infrastructure but also
the connectivity services that can be built on top of that, like e.g. L3VPNs
and L2VPNs.


The relevant documents specifying YANG models (and related status) for the
connectivity services are:

*	L3SM - A service model for L3VPN services - RFC 8299
*	L2SM - A service model for L2VPN service - RFC 8466
*	L1CMS -
<>  stable
working group document already reviewed by YANG doctors.
*	L3NM -
<>  stable
working group document


On the other side ACTN provides guidelines for the implementation of
interfaces for the management of traffic engineered underlay infrastructure
( A wide
variety of YANG models can be used to implement various features (e.g.
calendaring, telemetry) but a minimal set of mandatory models to operate the
network is identified:


*	TE topology:
<> - approved by
the IESG and in the editor queue
*	ACTN virtual network:
<> - stable
working group document
*	TE tunnel:
<> - stable working
group document


Extensions to these models are defined in the CCAMP working group to provide
technology specific extensions. TE Topology and TE tunnels augmentations are
being defined for WSON (Wavelength Switched Optical Networks), flexi grid
WSON, OTN (digital layer of the Optical Transport Network) and microwave.

In the eventuality in which the ETSI NFV ISG identifies additional
requirements that are not currently addressed in the ACTN framework
(RFC8453) and models, they can be proposed as individual contributions
either in the TEAS working group (if technology agnostic) or in the CCAMP
working group (if technology specific) and follow the IETF process.