Re: [i2rs] Call for Adoption by WG: draft-atlas-i2rs-architecture-01 (ends Aug 12)

[Alia Atlas <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jamal,

Thanks for your comments.  Responses in-line.

Alia

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I have the draft and support its adoption.
>
> Some comments:
> 1) ForCES model can support different levels of granularities. Yes,
> original intent
> was to do datapath control-southbound interfaces; but it is very usable in
> wide
> range of applications that desire a model. Example, if you attended the
> ForCES
> meeting you may have seen a demo where ForCES was used to model VMs
> doing arbitrary network functions where the ForCES was then used to
> orchestrate
> that infrastructure.
>

[Alia] You have been talking about ForCES as being applicable for quite a
while.  It would be interesting to read a draft that does the
compare/contrast for I2RS as well as the data-model for the RIB info model.
  There are also concerns about duplicating data models in different
technologies and issues around tool-chain availability and automation.


> 2) I think we may end up needing more clarity on the transport. Merely
> saying
> you'd use congestion-aware transport and spelling out desire for different
> levels of reliability is insufficient. An I2RS agent is a proxy;
> reliability and congestion
> control need to take into consideration those two requirements above the
> transport layer.
>

[Alia] Yes, the transport needed depends on the communication pattern being
used and that ties to the data-models as well.  I think we need a protocol
requirements draft that describes some of this in more detail.  I have the
idea that I2RS would have a default transport - and then some information
streams may only be available over a different transport channel - or the
client could request data across a different transport channel and so on.


> 3) identity/roles
> It would be useful to specify some sample space of common practise.
>

[Alia] Sure - I think this has to come out of the security space.  I've
heard suggestions about looking at the NetConf Access Control Model
(RFC6536).  I believe that Wes George was looking at some ideas and there
were a number of security-related folks interested at the WG meeting.

Regards,
Alia


> cheers,
> jamal
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Alia Atlas <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Please review draft-atlas-i2rs-architecture-01 and comment on whether it
> > should be adopted by I2RS.  Detailed technical conversation is also most
> > welcome.
> >
> > Authors: Are you aware of any IPR that applies to
> > draft-atlas-i2rs-architecture-01? Is so, has this IPR been disclosed in
> > compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for
> more
> > details).
> >
> > This WG call for adoption will complete on August 12.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alia
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > i2rs mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
> >
>