Re: [Ibnemo] role based intent

Dave Hood <dave.hood@ericsson.com> Wed, 03 June 2015 13:03 UTC

Return-Path: <dave.hood@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: ibnemo@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ibnemo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05F111A7008 for <ibnemo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 06:03:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WyGXLO7QAr6W for <ibnemo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 06:03:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usevmg20.ericsson.net (usevmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 948561A1EFD for <ibnemo@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 06:03:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c618062d-f79a96d000007fb1-5c-556ea1b514b3
Received: from EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.93]) by usevmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 90.1F.32689.5B1AE655; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 08:41:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB105.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.122]) by EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.93]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 09:03:18 -0400
From: Dave Hood <dave.hood@ericsson.com>
To: Zhoutianran <zhoutianran@huawei.com>, STUART VENTERS <stuart.venters@adtran.com>, "Natale, Bob" <RNATALE@mitre.org>
Thread-Topic: role based intent
Thread-Index: AdCdxq4VFvGDpUDvRK6YJXpiQnECmwANkqOQ
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 13:03:16 +0000
Message-ID: <8D15A2BAF93E9C49AB037A0647E5FA643F84C6C3@eusaamb105.ericsson.se>
References: <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F2166BBFAC2@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F2166BBFAC2@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.12]
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_8D15A2BAF93E9C49AB037A0647E5FA643F84C6C3eusaamb105erics_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrIIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPrO7WhXmhBhu3GVq03nzEZNF48ASz xfkFz1ksmtu3s1pMOLmA2YHVY8XERjaPliNvWT2WLPnJ5DF542E2j7cNV9kDWKO4bFJSczLL Uov07RK4Mlqud7AX9F1jrGh4fpypgXHbEcYuRg4OCQETib/d/l2MnECmmMSFe+vZuhi5OIQE jjJKfP96hBXCWcYosfBoKxtIFZuAhsSTS5OZQGwRgUqJdxN7WUBsZgE3iYPPzzOC2MICchJz m5dB1chL7Lx8jBVkmYiAkcTBIyYgJouAisTaZ4YgFbwCvhIHV3eBTRESCJXYv3YjO4jNKRAm 8efwcrCJjEC3fT+1hglik7jErSfzmSBuFpF4ePE0G4QtKvHy8T9WCFtJYs7ra8wg5zMLdDNK 7G5ZwgixTFDi5MwnLBMYRWchmTULWd0sJHUQRfkSvce3sELYOhILdn9ig7C1JZYtfM0MY585 8JgJU1xXYvqEI1BxRYnZy18xQixbyigxd+JvRpihNxbNY4MpmtL9kH0BI+8qRo7S4tSy3HQj g02MwDRxTIJNdwfjnpeWhxgFOBiVeHgT1PNChVgTy4orcw8xSnOwKInzOkYBhQTSE0tSs1NT C1KL4otKc1KLDzEycXBKNTBKbnmUdyDlhMDZwue3eOW39lncfy7lVX7qVsOTjvf39v9Z9jzi YJepo/CMCfEsmcc3f/fivrZCU8U49NnHCce1rI6Zax35c8HIxfF4b8yf1m6/5YxFBqeDuo/N tBApWx+xv719HXPsntJoob1zJfyStnzsEzl0mdfV+vju31XJseZiq4tjnbcosRRnJBpqMRcV JwIAP22KpPQCAAA=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ibnemo/pw_da6hGknpOz_4tVx8zMxRD8WQ>
Cc: "sdn@irtf.org" <sdn@irtf.org>, "ibnemo@ietf.org" <ibnemo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ibnemo] role based intent
X-BeenThere: ibnemo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of Nemo, an intent-based North Bound \(NB\) interface consisting of an application protocol running over HTTP \(RESTful interfaces\) to exchange intent-based primitives between applications and meta-controllers controlling virtual network resources \(networks, storage, CPU\)." <ibnemo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ibnemo>, <mailto:ibnemo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ibnemo/>
List-Help: <mailto:ibnemo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ibnemo>, <mailto:ibnemo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 13:03:24 -0000

Layering is the right issue, but the point is a little different. We, who look at the global scenario from the perspective of the gods, see that there is a recursion of clients/servers or customers/providers or ....

But from the perspective of any one of those interfaces, the other layers are completely invisible. So a given app can invoke intent against a given SDN controller, but the controller doesn't know whether the app is just a middleman, and the app doesn't know whether the controller can satisfy its requirements directly or whether it is also just a middleman.

You can have one intent layer, as long as you recognize that you are only seeing one slice of the world. If you insist on only one northernmost intent layer in toto, you will have to go back to the "make money" intent of the investors.

And if we recognize that each interface stands on its own, then any service invocation across that interface qualifies as an expression and satisfaction of intent by that particular invoker-provider pair.

Dave

From: Zhoutianran [mailto:zhoutianran@huawei.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 11:30 PM
To: Dave Hood; STUART VENTERS; Natale, Bob
Cc: ibnemo@ietf.org; sdn@irtf.org
Subject: role based intent


Hi Dave, Stuart, Bob and all,



I found many problems raised in the mailing list are coursed by the layered intent thinking. Maybe we are tainted by the ISO model:-)



For the layered intent, intent is a spectrum, very abstract at the top layer, more network specific and less abstract when the layer goes down. The problem is that the boundary of intent and non intent is vague. Or there is no boundary between this two, since one's what may be another one's how. And consequently, it looks like everything is intent and no clear intent definition.



The role based intent will provide only one intent layer. That is always the top layer abstraction for each role, as shown in the following figure. The functions can be layered as the implementation of the intent layer.

[cid:image001.jpg@01D09DC2.F851A1A0]

With the role based intent, although the end user's intent is much abstracted then the network administrator's intent, they are not related each other. I.e., the end user will not use the administrator's intent. And the admin will not provide additional services/interfaces to the end user.



The essential of layering is that the lower layer will provide interface to the higher layer. In order to fit up layer requirements, the lower layer will provide adequate interfaces/capabilities. That also means too much information for a dedicated up layer user/app.



For role based intent, we can firstly indentify various roles (no need to be complete, but those with attention), and then figure out the intent of each role. In this way, intent can be clear defined. That will also keep the intent of each role to a small set on what they really cares about, without expending to support other one's intent.





Best Regards,

Terence