Re: [Ibnemo] some clarification questions about IBnemo

["Susan Hares" <[e-mail]>]

Georgios: 

 

Nemo is a high level DSL North Bound Interface (NBI) for applications can
use to talk to controller at the network layer.  

 

Application

   ||  Nemo DSL

----------

Controller (with Nemo Engine with nemo model) 

  ||

  ||  (SBI) 

  || netconf (I2RS/config) 

 

Yang Is a descriptive rather than an intent based interface.  It is
extremely words and will change a functions change in the network.  Nemo as
a DSL will provide functions the user application wants.

 

Yang modules will be 10,000s different items in at least 100+ module.

Nemo 15 primitives with options. 

 

Would it be helpful, if I describe a potential security DSL?  

 

Sue 

From: Georgios Karagiannis [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 4:15 AM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [Ibnemo] some clarification questions about IBnemo

 

Hi Sue,

 

Thank you very much for the answers. Regarding the listed work items:

 

    c) Standardize Intent-Based Nemo DSL (domain-specific language) for
virtual networks. 

        IB-Nemo runs over a RESTful (http) interface. 

    d) Standardize Intent-Based Nemo DSL for Security devices  

    e) Standardize Intent-Based Nemo DSL for compute devices.   

 

 

 

What are the main differences between Intent-Based Nemo domain-specific
language and YANG?

By focusing on these three areas, the scope of the WG might be quite large.
If it is to focus only on one of these three work items, which one of them
will you choose?

 

Best regards,

Georgios

 

 

 

From: Susan Hares [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2015 4:15 AM
To: Georgios Karagiannis
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [Ibnemo] some clarification questions about IBnemo

 

Gergios:

 

Thank you for these great questions. 

 

 

1) What is the motivation of starting this working group? 

The motivation for starting this group comes out three things:  a) desire to
maximum usage of Network devices, b) Intent-Based theory and c) an 80/20
rule of interfaces.  

 

Desire to maximum network devices: 

Today's networks connect data centers to mobile users.  The Data Centers
operate to maximize the use of server's compute cycle, storage devices, and
networks.  A research study (2011-2012) examined how to maximize usage of
compute, storage, and networks using theoretical models.  This study showed
that if you optimize for any one facet (compute, storage, network) you
obtain 66% utilization of all facets.  However, if the applications can
communicate and negotiate their intent for compute, storage, or network -
the theoretical utilization can reach 95% or higher.  

 

The potential higher utilization combined with the lowering of costs due to
with the virtualization of network devices creates an economic environment
that radically changes the cost dynamics of IT technology.  

 

Intent-Based Networks

The signaling of the network changes via applications that direct SDN-based
networks via descriptive commands requires a large data flow between
applications and networks.   The application does not really want or need
the full description of the networks.   For example, a database application
simply needs to signal that it needs to connect to two other database
locations and exchange data with some maximum flow rate. 

 

Intent-based network signal this minimum required information, and let the
network set-up the rest. 

 

80/20 rules of applications

Some SDN orchestrators are "god-boxes" that need to know and direct
everything.  However, most applications really need only to signal intent.
The network engineers designing SDN orchestrators are 20% or less of the
total applications.   The other 80% of applications use the 20% of total
commands that request the high-level requests.   Intent based Domain
Specific languages (E.g. focused on network) allow simple commands to be
exchanged between the application and the SDN controller across a RESTful
interface (http protocol).  

 

This simpler interface for applications can enable a large class of new
applications to utilize the SDN controller. 

 

2) Are there use cases defined that are motivating this work?

 

The use case motivating this work:  

 

a) Simple interfaces for a new class of monitoring and manage applications
for the new NFV controllers controlling Carrier access networks or Cable
networks, 

 

b) Simple interfaces for the network-based application store that can load
query or load things on mobile networks, 

 

c) Large Database applications desiring to signal the network to set-up a
Virtual network to link database sites.  The set-up/tear down of this
network is controlled by the Application. 

 

d) Security devices seeking a short-term set-up of application layer
connection to exchange data. 

 

3) What are the work items?  

     a) Problem statement and use cases document 

    b) Intent Framework Description for Networks, Security, Storage, Compute


 

    c) Standardize Intent-Based Nemo DSL (domain-specific language) for
virtual networks. 

        IB-Nemo runs over a RESTful (http) interface. 

    d) Standardize Intent-Based Nemo DSL for Security devices  

    e) Standardize Intent-Based Nemo DSL for compute devices.   

 

4) Is the main goal of the WG to standardize a new protocol, or to extend an
existing one?

 

The main goal is to standardize a series of Domain-Specific languages which
run over RESTful interface (http). 

 

5)  What is the relation of IBnemo with existing IETF WGs?

 

                                       NBI        SDN    SBI   

IB-Nemo (application) ---- controller --- I2rs, netconf/netmod, 

                                                                       SACM

 

NBI - north bound interface

SBI - south bound interface 

 

Application protocols work such as  CoApp (CORE) produce http constrained to
small environment as a specialized application protocol.  However, these
protocols are not focused on enabling an Intent-Based application protocols
that will utilize NFV architectures.  

 

Before I launch into more details, please let me know if you have questions.


 

Sue Hares 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ibnemo [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Georgios
Karagiannis
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 4:32 AM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: [Ibnemo] some clarification questions about IBnemo

 

Hi Sue, Hi all,

 

In a previous email it is mentioned that:

 

"The Nemo-project group seeks to create a simple Intent-Based inter-operable
application protocol that forms a simple NorthBound API (NB) for
applications on any platform to control the following : a) setup and take
down of virtual networks between virtual nodes, b) control transfer of data
toward storage, and c) handle compute devices with a the minimal set of
intent-based primitives."

 

Can you please provide some clarifications on the following points?

 

o) What is the motivation of starting this working group? Are there use
cases defined that are motivating this work?

 

o) What are the work items? Is the main goal of the WG to standardize a new
protocol, or to extend an existing one?

 

o)  What is the relation of IBnemo with existing IETF WGs?

 

Best regards,

Georgios

 

_______________________________________________

Ibnemo mailing list

 <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail]

 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ibnemo>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ibnemo