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> Wed, 09 October 2013 18:41 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 C72B621F9D62 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 11:41:07 -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 zEQaYGpZyHtE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 11:40:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D10A621F9A16 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 11:40:56 -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 AYX48641; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 18:40:54 +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; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 19:40:18 +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; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 19:40:51 +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; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 11:40:45 -0700
From: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
To: "George, Wes" <wesley.george@twcable.com>, 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: AQHOxPp19lWAP+TdNkWZQwasso6e/JnsrhGA
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 18:40:45 +0000
Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645BD5357@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645BD4A63@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043C7557D4@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com>
In-Reply-To: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043C7557D4@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.212.245.38]
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: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 18:41:09 -0000

It is true that SDN depends on automation. 

IMHO, "Automation" is a much bigger area than SDN. 

When you look at Amazon EC2 graphic interface, you can click X number of VMs, and create any kind of virtual networks among them, along with a set of service functions to dictate inter-subnet communication. That is a "Software defined network". 

Linda

  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: George, Wes [mailto:wesley.george@twcable.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 9:18 AM
> To: Linda Dunbar; IETF Discussion
> 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
> 
> > From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of
> > Linda Dunbar
> 
> >
> > - 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.
> 
> [WEG] I strongly disagree. First, "we all understand..." is an
> overgeneralization, and a dangerous and grossly inaccurate one at that.
> Lots of SDN vendors have repeatedly demonstrated to me how little they
> actually understand about this problem. It's not a new problem by any
> means, but there's a really significant amount of hand-waving going on
> around the complexities of actually doing what they're saying is
> possible through the "magic" of SDN, when few have demonstrated how the
> abstract concept "SDN" actually makes solving this problem easier. The
> reality is that SDN and automation are inextricably linked. The next to
> last sentence in section 2.3 reinforces this, and I believe that 4.1 is
> absolutely appropriate for this draft. A truly software-defined network
> is an automated one, and any discussion of an operator's perspective on
> SDN is going to need to consider the same challenges that have been
> present in prior attempts to better automate network management,
> provisioning, and control. There are two models for managing a network
> like this, one that is fully automated, meaning that it is quite a lot
> more complex and susceptible to "ghost in the machine" problems, the
> other which has a human making most of the important decisions and then
> dictating those to the network. Even the latter model requires a
> significant amount of automation to execute what the human has decided
> should be done.
> The things covered in section 4.1 mirrors a lot of the discussion that
> I have had both internally and with other operators around the
> challenges of separating the hype of SDN from the actual benefit, and
> in selling this model to operations folks who are skeptical of ceding
> control to a set of computer logic.
> 
> Wes George
> 
> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
> proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject
> to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed.
> If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby
> notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken
> in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is
> strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-
> mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently
> delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.