Re: [Sdn] FW: Last Call: <draft-sin-sdnrg-sdn-approach-04.txt> (Software-Defined Networking: A Perspective From Within A Service Provider) to Informational RFC

Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com> Tue, 08 October 2013 20:18 UTC

Return-Path: <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F3F21F9C47 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:18:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jLQXl+K21Ocz for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21BE021F9BF7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:18:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AYS60003; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 20:18:32 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.146.0; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 21:18:00 +0100
Received: from DFWEML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.146.0; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 21:18:30 +0100
Received: from DFWEML509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.11.209]) by dfweml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.102]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:18:23 -0700
From: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
To: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Sdn] FW: Last Call: <draft-sin-sdnrg-sdn-approach-04.txt> (Software-Defined Networking: A Perspective From Within A Service Provider) to Informational RFC
Thread-Topic: [Sdn] FW: Last Call: <draft-sin-sdnrg-sdn-approach-04.txt> (Software-Defined Networking: A Perspective From Within A Service Provider) to Informational RFC
Thread-Index: AQI/ndlfzgUZlnPbGghF8PiUqVuXwpkH30OggAAazqCAAYpg4A==
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 20:18:22 +0000
Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645BD4A63@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.47.153.169]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 20:18:39 -0000

Adrian, 

Thanks for sharing this draft. This is a very good draft to summarize SDN for carrier networks. 

Two comments:
- 100% Agree with the draft on the emphasis of PDP (Policy Decision Point) and PEP (Policy enforcement Point) components of SDN. why does the draft emphasize that "SDN approach should be global, network-wide"? Here are a couple of examples that SDN is not global based:

1) The wireless' PCRF (Policy and Charging rules function) and PCEF (Policy Charging Enforcement Function) are good examples of SDN. However, PCRF and PCEF only control the access segments, not global network. 

2) In data center, centralized controller(s), with the information passed from VM management system,  can define (virtual) networks to interconnect Virtual machines. This network is local to Data Center, not necessarily global based. 
  

- We all understand the challenges of "Full Automation". However, the SDN and Full automation are two separate angles to Carrier networks. I find the Section 4.1  "Implications of full automation" actually de-rails the focus of the draft on SDN. 


My two cents. 

Linda 
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sdn-bounces@irtf.org [mailto:sdn-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of
> Adrian Farrel
> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 1:49 PM
> To: sdn@irtf.org
> Subject: [Sdn] FW: Last Call: <draft-sin-sdnrg-sdn-approach-04.txt>
> (Software-Defined Networking: A Perspective From Within A Service
> Provider) to Informational RFC
> 
> Heads up!
> 
> This document which was discussed from time-to-time in the SDNRG is
> going for
> IETF last call as an AD-sponsored independent submission.
> 
> Review comments are welcome as always. Please follow the instructions
> in the
> email below.
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce-
> > bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG
> > Sent: 07 October 2013 19:40
> > To: IETF-Announce
> > Subject: Last Call: <draft-sin-sdnrg-sdn-approach-04.txt> (Software-
> Defined
> > Networking: A Perspective From Within A Service Provider) to
> Informational RFC
> >
> >
> > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to
> consider
> > the following document:
> > - 'Software-Defined Networking: A Perspective From Within A Service
> >    Provider'
> >   <draft-sin-sdnrg-sdn-approach-04.txt> as Informational RFC
> >
> > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to
> the
> > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-11-04. Exceptionally, comments
> may be
> > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
> > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> >
> > Abstract
> >
> >    Software-Defined Networking (SDN) has been one of the major buzz
> >    words of the networking industry for the past couple of years.
> And
> >    yet, no clear definition of what SDN actually covers has been
> broadly
> >    admitted so far.  This document aims at contributing to the
> >    clarification of the SDN landscape by providing a perspective on
> >    requirements, issues and other considerations about SDN, as seen
> from
> >    within a service provider environment.
> >
> >    It is not meant to endlessly discuss what SDN truly means, but
> rather
> >    to suggest a functional taxonomy of the techniques that can be
> used
> >    under a SDN umbrella and to elaborate on the various pending
> issues
> >    the combined activation of such techniques inevitably raises.  As
> >    such, a definition of SDN is only mentioned for the sake of
> >    clarification.
> >
> >
> > The file can be obtained via
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sin-sdnrg-sdn-approach/
> >
> > IESG discussion can be tracked via
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sin-sdnrg-sdn-approach/ballot/
> >
> >
> > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sdn mailing list
> sdn@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/sdn