Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments

Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Thu, 09 August 2012 16:38 UTC

Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
X-Original-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 372DD21F86F3 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 09:38:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.203
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
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 hrjinttAJVdn for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 09:38:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1412C21F86EA for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 09:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DBF42240CB8; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 12:38:19 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at www.lucidvision.com
Received: from lucidvision.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (static-72-71-250-34.cncdnh.fios.verizon.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gCoPqaYuvuCE; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 12:38:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.45.10.199] (unknown [166.137.86.226]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA0342240CB5; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 12:38:18 -0400 (EDT)
References: <812700A304640D4292205D5E83FC59E1061C211D@p-embx01-eq.jnpr.net> <728F9B956B2C48439CA9294B1723B14623757671@dfweml509-mbs.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <728F9B956B2C48439CA9294B1723B14623757671@dfweml509-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <7441EA0C-2DB0-4B68-AD04-0F556CD1BE2E@lucidvision.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206)
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 12:38:12 -0400
To: Susan Hares <susan.hares@huawei.com>
Cc: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@juniper.net>, Gert Grammel <ggrammel@juniper.net>, Alia Atlas <akatlas@juniper.net>, Lenny Giuliano <lenny@juniper.net>, "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
X-BeenThere: irs-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <irs-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/irs-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:irs-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 16:38:22 -0000

We intended for irs to need both read and write capabilities, hence our use of "bidirectional" in describing the interface characteristics in the problem statement.  One big difference between existing "network management" and what we are trying to specify now is real-time transactional capabilities.

Tom 



On Aug 9, 2012, at 10:57 AM, Susan Hares <susan.hares@huawei.com> wrote:

> Gert:
> 
> How do you characterize network management?  Traditionally network management has been viewed in the IETF in two streams:  monitoring (active or passive) and configuration.  
> 
> What parts of these features do you think the IRS system needs to avoid? 
> 
> Sue 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gert Grammel
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 6:41 PM
> To: Thomas Nadeau; Lenny Giuliano; Alia Atlas
> Cc: irs-discuss@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
> 
> Tom,
> 
> It is confusing to understand whether IRS belongs to a new network management plane or if it's more of a control plane extension. The draft wisely avoids this classification.
> To me IRS appears to be a completely different beast which should best be  characterized as 'Network Programming Plane' NPP. 
> It neither aims to do full provisioning (as a management plane would do) nor aims to replace routing (as a control plane would do).
> Hence we better name the baby NPP -- thereby avoiding any linkage to taxation.
> 
> 
> Gert
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org <irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org>
> To: Lenny Giuliano; Alia Atlas
> Cc: irs-discuss@ietf.org <irs-discuss@ietf.org>
> Sent: Tue Jul 31 01:50:40 2012
> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
> 
> 
> [Re-adding IRS]
> 
>    Thank you for reviewing and the comments. We will incorporate the edits
> in the next rev.
> 
>    --Tom
> 
> 
> On 7/30/12 5:04 PM, "Lenny Giuliano" <lenny@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Minor points:
>> 
>> -section 4, para 2, 3rd sentence, "Howeve,r"
>> 
>> -4.1.3 "There is no bidirectional programmatic interface to add, modify,
>>   remove or read state from the multicast RIB."
>>    -How is this unique to mcast?  Couldn't you say the same thing
>>    about unicast?
>> 
>> -4.1.3 "The multicast state added need not match to well-known protocol
>>   installed state.  For instance, traffic received on an specified set,
>>   or all, interfaces that is destined to a particular prefix from all
>>   sources or a particular prefix could be subject to the specified
>>   replication."
>>    -Not clear to me at all what this para is saying.
>> 
>> -"IRS"- you may want to select a different acronym that isn't related to
>> something as unpopular as taxation (something we learned with AMT).
>> Maybe 
>> RSI instead...
>> 
>> Overall, I found the doc to be clearly written and straightforward.
>> Sounds like Openflow for routers.  Not sure if it's intentional that you
>> didn't mention Openflow, but it did seem like an elephant in the room as
>> I 
>> was reading thru.  Also, I did wonder what was new and novel here, as
>> this 
>> sounded like our SDK which has been around for years.
>> 
>> 
>> -Lenny
> 
> _______________________________________________
> irs-discuss mailing list
> irs-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> irs-discuss mailing list
> irs-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> irs-discuss mailing list
> irs-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss
>