IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] New Version draft-shytyi-netmod-vysm-02.txt as Working Group document.

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Wed, 28 August 2019 01:12 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 573F712081D for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 18:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xEwNVmXpT-bz for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 18:12:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E697120816 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 18:12:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml709-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 1479D5C405D184086845 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 02:12:48 +0100 (IST)
Received: from DGGEML421-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.38) by lhreml709-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 02:12:47 +0100
Received: from DGGEML511-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.9]) by dggeml421-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.38]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 09:12:41 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Robert Varga <nite@hq.sk>, Dmytro Shytyi <ietf.dmytro@shytyi.net>, netmod <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] New Version draft-shytyi-netmod-vysm-02.txt as Working Group document.
Thread-Index: AdVdPV/8T7gox5PfSzOuFAPYBpWldA==
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 01:12:40 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA92B372E@dggeml511-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.134.31.203]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/9F4muFiM4aoP3eZyNugu5nYh1Aw>
Subject: Re: [netmod] New Version draft-shytyi-netmod-vysm-02.txt as Working Group document.
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 01:12:52 -0000

+1, in addition, I am wondering whether this is something related to overlay topology model, if yes, how it is different from DC Fabric topology model defined in RFC8542?

-Qin
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Robert Varga
发送时间: 2019年8月28日 7:44
收件人: Dmytro Shytyi <ietf.dmytro@shytyi.net>; netmod <netmod@ietf.org>
主题: Re: [netmod] New Version draft-shytyi-netmod-vysm-02.txt as Working Group document.

On 27/08/2019 18:03, Dmytro Shytyi wrote:
> Dear All,
> 
> I am one of the authors of ID VYSM and I would like to draw your 
> attention to the evolution of the draft 
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-shytyi-netmod-vysm-01.txt.
> Recently we produced (but did not submitted yet) a new version of ID
> (02) and I beleive it fits the netmod working group.
> 
> We would be gratefull if you could suggest if the new version(02) of 
> the document  could become an official work item of the WG?
>       If yes, could you please indicate which modifications must be 
> done in the document before submition.

Hmm, looking over the model, it would seem there is quite a bit of overlap with RFC8345 -- to the point I believe the model could be formulated in terms of RFC8345 specialization:

virtualization -> networks/network

device/links/interfaces/switches/vms are probably a mix of node/termmination-point/link extensions with conjunction with supporting-{topology,node,link}.

How would the draft relate to RFC8345? Should it perhaps call out it is a different take on the similar problem, specialized to a particular use-case?

Regards,
Robert (with RFC8345 co-author hat on)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email