Re: [ippm] [Teas] Availability metrics in the IETF Network Slice

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Hi Med,
thank you for your comments and suggestions (the .doc version is attached).
I will discuss this with the authors and share updates addressing them.

Kind regards,
Greg

On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 12:07 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> Sure. Feel free to forward the review to IPPM list as I’m not on that
> list.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Med
>
>
>
> *De :* Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>
> *Envoyé :* lundi 4 avril 2022 19:04
> *À :* BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[e-mail]>
> *Objet :* Re: [Teas] Availability metrics in the IETF Network Slice
>
>
>
> Hi Med,
>
> thank you for your review and comments. Will review and discuss with the
> co-authors and be back with the proposed updates. I wonder if you would
> agree to sending references to your review on the mailing lists (IPPM would
> be especially helpful to progress this work). Much appreciate your help and
> support.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 7:17 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> Thank you for sharing this work.
>
>
>
> As you are looking for comments on PAM, you may check
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/74p99UxkyxzPII92VVV6f9tSbYA/:
>
>
>
>    - pdf:
>    https://raw.githubusercontent.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/master/draft-mhmcsfh-ippm-pam-00-rev%20Med.pdf
>    - doc:
>    https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-mhmcsfh-ippm-pam-00-rev%20Med.doc
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Med
>
>
>
> *De :* Teas <[e-mail]> *De la part de* Greg Mirsky
> *Envoyé :* lundi 4 avril 2022 16:04
> *À :* Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>; TEAS WG <[e-mail]>; IETF
> IPPM WG <[e-mail]>
> *Objet :* [Teas] Availability metrics in the IETF Network Slice
>
>
>
> Hi Adrian, et al,
>
> I've got a question about the relationship of performance metrics like
> packet loss ratio, packet delay, packet delay variation of an IETF Network
> Slice service (NSS), on one hand, and IETF NSS availability. I think that
> Section 4.1.1.1 considers all these metrics as Directly Measurable SLOs. I
> agree with such characterization in regard to loss and delay while I am not
> sure that that applies to the availability. The issue I have is that, as
> far as I know, there's no formal definition of the availability metric in
> the document and it seems that we've been using it in a colloquial way. A
> group of us started to work on a definition of the availability as a
> performance metric for a multi-SLO service
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mhmcsfh-ippm-pam/>. We had
> discussed this work at the IPPM WG meeting at IETF-113. I think that this
> work is relevant to the discussion of the IETF NSS availability. If that is
> the case, perhaps the characterization of the availability in Section
> 4.1.1.1 can be further enhanced with the reference to
> the draft-mhmcsfh-ippm-pam.
>
> I greatly appreciate your comments, questions, and suggestions on our work
> on Precision Availability Metrics.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> PS. Attached, please find the presentation slides from the IPPM WG meeting.
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
>
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
>
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
>
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
>
> Thank you.
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
>