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

yanshen <> Fri, 21 July 2017 07:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0116B129A92 for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:33:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y6gyCpF41Fcz for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:33:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02B8812714F for <>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:33:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (EHLO ([]) by (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DRR56543; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 07:33:14 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 08:33:13 +0100
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 15:32:59 +0800
From: yanshen <>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=F4me_Fran=E7ois?= <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [Idnet] IETF99 for applying AI/ML into network management: Follow-up
Thread-Index: AQHTAXpo1/qEM484V0O2Qui8QzokZKJd1xaA
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 07:32:58 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020205.5971AE3A.00B3, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 8278677a77aa3ed625b196cca4ff8843
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: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 07:33:18 -0000

Dear Jerome,

Thanks for your comment. Please find the reply in below. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: IDNET [] On Behalf Of Jér?me Fran?ois
> Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 1:05 AM
> To:
> Subject: [Idnet] IETF99 for applying AI/ML into network management: Follow-up
> Dear all,
> Thanks Sheng for having organized the meeting. As we are running out of time,
> here are some comments I want to share:
> - in the figure with the loop, data to be used could be from other sources of data
> out from the network to enrich the analysis

It is significant. The data indeed is from not only the network itself but also from other sources. Sometimes I ever thought the "non-network data" influence more, for example, a popular movie or online sales may detonate the traffic. In details, different users can utilize their private data to build their requirements. Such as, a content provider may use subscribers' data to train and optimize its delivery strategy. From the view of standardization, more data source could expand the impact and attract more players joining in the work.

> - regarding use cases, it was unclear for me what is your or the group plan. I think
> many of us express interests for other use cases but I'm not sure how to
> contribute / select use cases (and if we have to ? -> see next item)
> - the immediate plan is to organize a regular workshop (probably within NMRG). I
> fully support the idea as this helps to federate the community first to ambition
> then coordinated actions (regarding the issues with datasets for example). But
> recall that that will be workshop within a RG group and it is probably too early to
> identify what should be standardized  (or look at a WG in that case). Looking at
> the experience with flow measurement workshop (within NMRG as well), it
> should be more open for presentations and discussions and if a potential
> standard is identified, this can be targeted afterwards.

I support the regular workshop (whatever in any form). I fully understand your worried about the "too early". However, I think it is better to find a common or say a potential standardized point to concentrate the focus. After that, we can expand our focus to other valuable area. A details point may help us to clear up the thought, during which we may evolve a clear methodology for the future work. Of course I totally agree with your open attitude. I mean only to concentrate the topic firstly. 

> Best regards,
> Jerome

Thanks for reading. And I hope I have caught up all your points here.


> _______________________________________________
> IDNET mailing list