Re: [Ibnemo] [Nfvrg] 答复: Defining a Common Model for intent

["Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <[e-mail]>]

i like the picture below, and it makes sense I think (at least to me it does)

Bert
On 08/06/15 11:35, Zhoutianran wrote:
>
> Hi Sue,
>
> I agree your concept that “roles are constraints on the intent”.
>
> Can we use the following figure to show the orthogonal?
>
> 1.We organize intent with role groups.
>
> 2.For each role, the intent can cover many layers functions.
>
> And in this way, we do not have to constrain role’s intent into a specific layer. That would be more flexible and easy to express 
> one’s intent.
>
> role.png
>
> Best,
>
> Terence
>
> *From:*Nfvrg [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *Susan Hares
> *Sent:* Saturday, June 06, 2015 3:04 AM
> *To:* 'PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ'; zhangyali (D); [e-mail]
> *Cc:* [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> *Subject:* Re: [Nfvrg] 答复: [Ibnemo] Defining a Common Model for intent
>
> Pedro:
>
> Interesting! You consider level within the company a role (top managers vs. NOC) and the infrastructure-based  - a different 
> orthogonal.   I think this still fits within my concept that we are describing roles as groups of constraints on intent.   Do you 
> think role and infrastructure-based roles/constraints – are orthogonal constraints on intent?
>
> Sue
>
> *From:*PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Sent:* Friday, June 05, 2015 1:50 AM
> *To:* Susan Hares; 'zhangyali (D)'; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [Nfvrg] 答复: [Ibnemo] Defining a Common Model for intent
>
> Hi Sue,
>
> Let me refine a bit:
>
> Example 1:
>
> AS1 provider for AS2: normally means that AS1 sets a set of policies that filter out any prefixes that don’t come from AS2 or its 
> clients, while AS2 receives all advertisements from AS1. There is no implied symmetry there and how these policies are then 
> implemented depends on the equipment AS1 and AS2 have.
>
> Example 2:
>
> Load balancing: in the context of AS1 being a provider for AS2 means that As1 will indicate AS2 how to mark advertisements to 
> accomplish load balancing.
>
> So for role based intent these are two different ‘layers’in a company (top manager versus NOC responsible)
>
> However, if we try to layer the infrastructure we are in the same ‘inter domain’layer (as opposed to an ‘intra domain’layer)
>
> This is why I see the ‘role-based’intent being orthogonal to an ‘infrastructure-based’intent. I believe that we need to take these 
> (hopefully only) two dimensions into account.
>
> Best, /PA
>
> *De: *Sue Hares <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> *Fecha: *jueves, 4 de junio de 2015 04:11
> *Para: *PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "'zhangyali (D)'" 
> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> *CC: *"[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> *Asunto: *RE: [Nfvrg] 答复: [Ibnemo] Defining a Common Model for intent
>
>     Pedro:
>
>     I agree with your BGP examples.  It too is my favorite topic.
>
>     Example 1 : AS1 as provider for AS2 –
>
>     This service provider’s (user’s) intent with the context of BGP infrastructure.
>
>     Is it AS1 intent or AS2 intent or symmetric intent?  I think symmetric.
>
>     This is like a link in a node AS1--- AS-Link -- AS2
>
>     Example 2: AS1 as a provider intents to load balance traffic to AS 2:
>
>                       This is AS1’s intent.
>
>                       This intent is like our original model:  AS1-link-AS2 with Dataflow balanced.
>
>                                     Intent = connection at flow distribution
>
>                                     Context: BGP infrastructure
>
>     Do you think I understand your examples?
>
>     Sue
>
>     *From:*PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ [mailto:[e-mail]]
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, June 03, 2015 2:13 AM
>     *To:* Susan Hares; 'zhangyali (D)'; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     *Cc:* [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     *Subject:* Re: [Nfvrg] 答 复: [Ibnemo] Defining a Common Model for intent
>
>     Hi,
>
>     So, let’s keep in one layer first. And since you mention my pet-topic (BGP), let’s stay there :-)
>
>     Ex.1
>
>     There is a lot of work on the relations between autonomous systems (provider, client, sibling, etc.)
>
>     So intent for me is the assertion "AS1 is a provider for AS2”; the implementation would use advertisements, route-maps etc.
>     and that is not intent
>
>     Ex.2
>
>     AS1 is connected to AS2, he has several links and wants to implement load-balancing between them. “Load balancing" is the
>     intent and advertisements, route-maps etc. is the implementation and that’s not intent.
>
>     From an infrastructure point of view, we have two instances of intent at the same “layer”. However role-wise, the decision of
>     entering a client-provider relationship between ASes is taken in the ‘management floor’and the decision of load-balancing in
>     taken in the Network Operation Centre. This is the reason for my double take at intent
>
>     Regarding whether intent @ layer N + context @ layer N —> something @ layer N-1 and from my example above depends how or
>     whether we structure the role dimension into layers.
>
>     The policy continuum paper would somehow suggest that this mapping between layers somehow happens in the infrastructure dimension
>
>     My .2 cents,
>
>     /PA
>
>     *De: *Sue Hares <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>     *Fecha: *miércoles, 3 de junio de 2015 00:48
>     *Para: *PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "'zhangyali (D)'"
>     <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>     *CC: *"[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>"
>     <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>     *Asunto: *RE: [Nfvrg] 答复: [Ibnemo] Defining a Common Model for intent
>
>         Pedro and Yali:
>
>         It helps to keep in the networking domain where I am familiar with work!  I agree that intent goes through the layers, but
>         I still struggle to make the connections.
>
>         I know that instances of code (BGP) on devices create zones  of connectivity (sub-domains/subnets, AS, Groups of AS), but
>         I think there must be  more in the intent discuss.  Yinben and Yali’s comments that
>
>         User àintent àcontext
>
>         is still the key information.    Is it Intent + context (layer n) to ? at layer n-1.
>
>         Sue
>
>         PS - Perhaps I am tainted by the ISO model that suggests lower layers provide services for lower layers.
>
>         *From:*Nfvrg [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ
>         *Sent:* Tuesday, June 02, 2015 2:38 AM
>         *To:* zhangyali (D); Susan Hares; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>         *Cc:* [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]>
>         *Subject:* Re: [Nfvrg] 答 复: [Ibnemo] Defining a Common Model for intent
>
>         Hi Yali,
>
>         let’s keep in the networking domain :-) I strongly believe that we need different levels or layers of intent. However,
>         there are (at least) two different viewpoints:
>
>         If you follow the infrastructure view(which is where I feel more comfortable), I hope we agree that it is a completely
>         different situation when you are designing a network element-by-element than when you are designing the network at a
>         sub-domain level (for example levels in an IS-IS based network or areas if you use OSPF) or if you are defining the
>         interconnections of a service provider’s AS (and dealing with BGP-4 policies) or if you are defining an end-to-end
>         service. Although at the end, the upper layers will use all the features provided by the lower layers.
>
>         Now, I’m sure we can find the equivalent layering from a role point of view:
>
>         The user wants to access a service (for example a Web page), the provider of that Web page wants it to be served with the
>         best quality of experience and so he chooses a specific provider –normally a CDN). The CDN provider will choose a given
>         carrier to get access to the user’s service provider. The user’s service provider will dimension his network to fulfill a
>         series of criteria. Within the service provider, the operators sitting at the Network Operations Centre will have to
>         fulfill a series of KPIs, etc.
>
>         As you see, I’m more a ‘box’thinker. However, if someone can complete the ‘role’example we can compare both approaches and
>         try to identify if we can do any mapping between the two views. Maybe we could come up at end with a set of common
>         denominators we can use to continue this discussion.
>
>         Best,
>
>         /PA
>
>         *De: *"zhangyali (D)" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>         *Fecha: *martes, 2 de junio de 2015 05:52
>         *Para: *PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Sue Hares
>         <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>         *CC: *"[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>"
>         <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>         *Asunto: *答 复: [Ibnemo] Defining a Common Model for intent
>         *Nuevo envío de: *<[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>         *Nuevo envío para: *<[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>         *Fecha de nuevo envío: *martes, 2 de junio de 2015 05:52
>
>             Hi Pedro,
>
>             Thanks for reviewing the draft and giving modification.
>
>             The question you have mentioned is a very important point for the abstraction of intent model. Maybe we can propose
>             the transport market as a analogy.
>
>             1.A customer wants to transport his goods from A to B. So his intent is getting his goods from A to B without carrying
>             about how to do it. Then his intent is transferred to the transportation system.
>
>             2.This system analyzes customer’s requirement, and choose a suitable way to complete the requirement. For example, the
>             system choose truck as the means. So the intent of transportation system is transferring the goods with truck.
>
>             3.The driver of this truck analyze the path from A to B, and choose a most appropriate path to complete this order
>             which will save more time. So  the intent of driver may be transferring the goods with the least time. Then the driver
>             will start the engine, step on the gas, etc.
>
>             From this analogy, the ultimate effect is the same, namely, transfer the goods from A to B. But the specific intent of
>             different roles has some differences which depends on user’ role, knowledge, responsibility, etc. For example,
>             transportation system is responsible for transporting goods, and he know the various ways. So he can form his intent
>             by rendering the upper customer’s intent.
>
>             Supposing we divide users into different layers according to the implementation series, users in upper layer expresses
>             his intent as /what/ he want without having the knowledge about /how/ to do it. Then the /how/ procedure will be
>             transferred to /what /in the lower layer according to knowledge and context. These transfer procedure lead to the
>             completion of requirement. Same with the example in draft. Although the ultimate effect is same, the focus is
>             different which will bring out the differentiation of intent.
>
>             This is just my immature opinion about intent. Do you think the differentiation of intent to complete the same thing
>             is important and reasonable?
>
>             Best Regards,
>
>             Yali
>
>             *发 件人:*PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ [mailto:[e-mail]]
>             *发 送时间:*2015年6月1日17:15
>             *收件人:*Susan Hares; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>             *抄送:*[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
>             <mailto:[e-mail]>
>             *主题:*Re: [Ibnemo] Defining a Common Model for intent
>
>             Hi,
>
>             A small clarification proposal for draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xia-ibnemo-icim/.
>
>             In section 2.4, I would leave the following as a paragraph
>
>             For example, in the network area the intent of end-users could be
>
>             safe connectivity between two sites which a technology independent
>
>             and device independent requirement. For business-based network
>
>             designers, the network connectivity can be selected which is device-
>
>             independent but technology specific. An example of the business-based
>
>             technology is the L3VPN.
>
>             And change:
>
>             For network administrators, intent can be
>
>             specific operations on a set of devices such as configuring IP
>
>             addresses on network servers in a data center.
>
>             To
>
>             For network administrators, intent can be <new>defining a network topology like a router connected to a firewall, connected to a load balancer and this to two L2 networks where WWW servers sit or specifying the</new> operations on a set of devices such as configuring IP addresses on network servers in a data center.
>
>               
>
>             Rationale behind this is again, that intent should be anything that is invariant and that expresses/what/  a network operator/administrator may need to do, as opposed to/how/  he would do that, i.e. The router is a HW device from vendor X or a virtual machine running a specific routing daemon over a given data-path implementation.
>
>             Best, /PA
>
>             ---
>
>             Dr. Pedro A. Aranda Gutiérrez
>
>             Technology Exploration -
>
>             Network Innovation & Virtualisation
>
>             email: pedroa d0t aranda At telefonica d0t com
>
>             Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
>
>             C/ D. Ramón de la Cruz,84
>
>             28006 Madrid, Spain
>
>             Fragen sind nicht da, um beantwortet zu werden.
>
>             Fragen sind da, um gestellt zu werden.
>
>             Georg Kreisler
>
>             ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>             Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o
>             confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado,
>             queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en
>             virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique
>             inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.
>
>             The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of
>             the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
>             notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>             received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received
>             this communication in error and then delete it.
>
>             Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou
>             confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado,
>             fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da
>             legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma
>             via e proceda a sua destruição
>
>         ---
>
>         Dr. Pedro A. Aranda Gutiérrez
>
>         Technology Exploration -
>
>         Network Innovation & Virtualisation
>
>         email: pedroa d0t aranda At telefonica d0t com
>
>         Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
>
>         C/ D. Ramón de la Cruz,84
>
>         28006 Madrid, Spain
>
>         Fragen sind nicht da, um beantwortet zu werden.
>
>         Fragen sind da, um gestellt zu werden.
>
>         Georg Kreisler
>
>         ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>         Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o
>         confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda
>         notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la
>         legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma
>         vía y proceda a su destrucción.
>
>         The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the
>         individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
>         that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>         transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in
>         error and then delete it.
>
>         Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou
>         confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado,
>         fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da
>         legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e
>         proceda a sua destruição
>
>     ---
>
>     Dr. Pedro A. Aranda Gutiérrez
>
>     Technology Exploration -
>
>     Network Innovation & Virtualisation
>
>     email: pedroa d0t aranda At telefonica d0t com
>
>     Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
>
>     C/ D. Ramón de la Cruz,84
>
>     28006 Madrid, Spain
>
>     Fragen sind nicht da, um beantwortet zu werden.
>
>     Fragen sind da, um gestellt zu werden.
>
>     Georg Kreisler
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>     Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o
>     confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda
>     notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la
>     legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía
>     y proceda a su destrucción.
>
>     The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the
>     individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
>     any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>     transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in
>     error and then delete it.
>
>     Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial
>     e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de
>     que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se
>     recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição
>
> ---
>
> Dr. Pedro A. Aranda Gutiérrez
>
> Technology Exploration -
>
> Network Innovation & Virtualisation
>
> email: pedroa d0t aranda At telefonica d0t com
>
> Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
>
> C/ D. Ramón de la Cruz,84
>
> 28006 Madrid, Spain
>
> Fragen sind nicht da, um beantwortet zu werden.
>
> Fragen sind da, um gestellt zu werden.
>
> Georg Kreisler
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y 
> es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la 
> lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha 
> recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.
>
> The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the 
> individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
> dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in 
> error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it.
>
> Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é 
> para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a 
> leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta 
> mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibnemo mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ibnemo