Re: [Idnet] IETF99 for applying AI/ML into network management: Follow-up

Jérôme François <> Wed, 26 July 2017 19:35 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83CBC131761 for <>; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tGw5MC4K5DgJ for <>; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:35:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26C69126CD6 for <>; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,416,1496095200"; d="scan'208";a="285062547"
Received: from unknown (HELO []) ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 26 Jul 2017 21:35:29 +0200
To: Sheng Jiang <>, yanshen <>, "" <>
References: <> <> <> <>
From: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgRnJhbsOnb2lz?= <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 21:35:27 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idnet] IETF99 for applying AI/ML into network management: Follow-up
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The IDNet \(Intelligence-Defined Network\) " <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 19:35:35 -0000


> Of course, we would like to target a WG if we could. However, so far, we have not converged at all. It seems there are full of possibilities to apply AI/ML in networks. It seems everybody is talking about their own use cases. Until we converged with one or two very specific use cases that are also generic and significance, or we might find some fundamental functionalities that are generically support various AI use cases, we may not have anything to standardized. So far, we are still in the way to find these work items. So, let's keep discussing use cases and fundamental functionalities. Hopefully, with more discussion, we could reduce our scope to be more and more focus. Then we may have concrete work items to form a WG.
I agree that before formally targeting a WG, we need something specific
to be address. I said "something" because it could be a use case where
AI is applied, a generic problem across use case, interfaces....

But my little concern is that I would avoid that planned workshop would
be stricly limited to particular use cases, problems or architecture.
In my opinion, we have to take care of the two items (community building
with the workshop and scope refinement) in parallel but we could, of
course, expect that the workshop gives us some input to refine our
target in the proper way.