Re: [Netslices] Input for problem statement
Liang GENG <liang.geng@hotmail.com> Tue, 09 January 2018 14:53 UTC
Return-Path: <liang.geng@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: netslices@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netslices@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A5512D86A
for <netslices@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 06:53:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.124
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.124 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2=0.874, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
header.d=hotmail.com
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 qxX4BC3L3e4S for <netslices@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 06:53:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from APC01-SG2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
(mail-oln040092253087.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.253.87])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBAF212D868
for <NetSlices@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 06:53:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com;
s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version;
bh=/GsO463ctvhannpkpQc0+pK2QrKkCmFCoeqoQCnEZF8=;
b=bxPfJJ1JC88d9F4Wxc7aoko+Qv06d9Af/EyiWx9fyeanA5lOsfDSokkdjWASgt8wA70J6rU0czlad3rNDsBp87d0r32e0epo15Zffce6A72r08xoDzNkE6HQ06FygHwg6CXBUQtYKJpTXScf6nPxYGoZX6t3Wnt7d1soYKkJE1TuBzx8VEABrWrVTifwIL668NMjmnitzml8xhPgebJ0mHxmrJ3uXqqHqUW1JhQW8PYKc6HVT/tG/nQlqjIyw103vrQQC/Ck2XazTGF/WE6Vs6JIHdpAmfM5S5MU+o836Fa2Xdb80cIseUrU8eWcEZZovLIlvygpbm7Tw4X+1ECR2A==
Received: from PU1APC01FT041.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com
(10.152.252.57) by PU1APC01HT051.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com
(10.152.253.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.20.345.12; Tue, 9
Jan 2018 14:53:25 +0000
Received: from PS1PR0601MB1483.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.152.252.56) by
PU1APC01FT041.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.253.108) with Microsoft
SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.20.302.6 via
Frontend Transport; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 14:53:26 +0000
Received: from PS1PR0601MB1483.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com
([fe80::ac8f:ab59:fccb:6f1b]) by PS1PR0601MB1483.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com
([fe80::ac8f:ab59:fccb:6f1b%14]) with mapi id 15.20.0386.009; Tue, 9 Jan 2018
14:53:25 +0000
From: Liang GENG <liang.geng@hotmail.com>
To: "De Foy, Xavier" <Xavier.DeFoy@InterDigital.com>, "Geng, Liang"
<gengliang@chinamobile.com>
CC: "NetSlices@ietf.org" <NetSlices@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Input for problem statement
Thread-Index: AdNuA9Or9uGgHX1nTjCE/IjGRVBA4wbUxFOu
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 14:53:25 +0000
Message-ID: <PS1PR0601MB1483DDA819BB8370C47E30B287100@PS1PR0601MB1483.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
References: <MWHPR10MB16321D6982B2E7FEE07F63B2E53D0@MWHPR10MB1632.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR10MB16321D6982B2E7FEE07F63B2E53D0@MWHPR10MB1632.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:DE6BAC521893985D91E507464687756AD2C127A01001A99A1C877F585C819670;
UpperCasedChecksum:96730927DF388D8C6C33D540A536E84A6D920993D8108EDC1041B9E19D45F01C;
SizeAsReceived:7145; Count:46
x-tmn: [/Aq2qUQga2TEA5JspV3FIBfZWbEXpu1E]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; PU1APC01HT051;
6:K+W4xx+hTyxgshm3NSzuIIwXcLDQQuDcDsdV4rgGpV9Bq2T/qKSFLgeooXcGLgnZvwuybYsw/YrbMBy8rO6QLXK9IM2I0lc9gysehFB9c4mQcE4oSd+mRgHxZkH2LDYXit+ilwYWLL2muzMREQksAY5Lb3S8I3EO90h5hTONUPuP+ls5DJNooN8TJRJSc8xgXQY4tkZoCeY5ggPvUMfAtmjM9eVlowMaUHbGBtHpIoriGslMnDgEDv6SDpaHJ48jMI259FE46rvILCEunKDBkUBu0ct7om06cMaTSjNzpZYv/rSyOXHfAptkCuilm9IgS774LVxmlGdkhTWwW0aHe7YZ9+pxqrRsn/HlR/b/wtU=;
5:srxY46VVddOSnkfrn6UaQxqvlBN/sFVpIfaLfH+I/YC8E0JNL3oqRykpTb3m/z1xh8XShZ9vFYmZipEVGnh/m/nvhAkTsqCktodKrohr98KByx9LsaKYGaIrdW4QKTr4OSrWcLvATDqFCaCovDOCK/jesYxB5MY9HjtvvmhfzlU=;
24:743t35ZV9kBNzFwW0y+kjaZFCjF2nmDnvoEmeBtCJG7kBLyUwMqGCsFnIYVbHUkrYDcR4cMcArhlXmkB+1hFsw6lXPBtMM/r4l58OebNi4Y=;
7:Fv421lN5r+W8HNFdEGcd2F29BXTjoSJhKDgN8jr66ZjGKR+3fXSYmmZIHF58PtTXfSOTSpwrJjWvCGmpx6+6diNjADQaQ06Gie9+nu4sziqjOZDlnRRBIB+qgWTpItdf+oSjtgKuv+UmUwfKd6uqx51g0/qpACoJN+V956PyyO84EVkEC7lnDipyWO9JJzjyRoOx9OptqbbB0kVauaUYGtZPvTO6tnB5gOV/527uc0JXhY/eqao9zLXEtW+ee+E2
x-incomingheadercount: 46
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0;
RULEID:(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031324274)(2017031323274)(2017031322404)(1603101448)(1601125374)(1701031045);
SRVR:PU1APC01HT051;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: PU1APC01HT051:
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c96a7626-5d9a-4762-137f-08d55770bcb9
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(444000031);
SRVR:PU1APC01HT051; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000803101)(100110400095);
SRVR:PU1APC01HT051;
x-forefront-prvs: 0547116B72
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(7070007)(98901004); DIR:OUT;
SFP:1901; SCL:1; SRVR:PU1APC01HT051;
H:PS1PR0601MB1483.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_PS1PR0601MB1483DDA819BB8370C47E30B287100PS1PR0601MB1483_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c96a7626-5d9a-4762-137f-08d55770bcb9
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Jan 2018 14:53:25.3919 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: PU1APC01HT051
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netslices/WAQSY70FDZyrLckKfjlTE3Zrx3g>
Subject: Re: [Netslices] Input for problem statement
X-BeenThere: netslices@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This list is intended for discussion and review of network slicing
at IETF." <netslices.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netslices>,
<mailto:netslices-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netslices/>
List-Post: <mailto:netslices@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netslices-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netslices>,
<mailto:netslices-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2018 14:53:32 -0000
Hi Xavier, Thanks for your very helpful suggestion. As we discussed during IETF100, I believe the recursive nature of COMS is very important and it is sensible to make the terms aligned with NGMN definition. I will update the problem statement draft accordingly. In additional, do you think we can take out the end-to-end slice manager for non-3GPP scenarios since the COMS may comes into the picture from the top-level slice manager/controller? Best wishes Liang ________________________________ From: Netslices <netslices-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of De Foy, Xavier <Xavier.DeFoy@InterDigital.com> Sent: 06 December 2017 04:21:07 To: Geng, Liang Cc: NetSlices@ietf.org Subject: [Netslices] Input for problem statement Hi Liang, This is to follow-up our conversation at IETF 100 about draft-geng-coms-problem-statement, and share on the list. The goal would be to make a recursive use of the same (COMS) model, from top to bottom. A secondary point would be to align our use of the terms “slice segment” and “slice subnet” across drafts. Since “subnet” is defined by NGMN it could be simpler to use that term, as long as our definition is compatible with NGMN. There is a definition in the interconnection draft. Please consider the following figure as input for an update to figure 2: e.g. “cross-segment” could become “end-to-end”, “segment-specific” could become “technology specific”, etc. One additional thing we could consider is using a single term “manager” or “controller”. This would be better aligned with the recursive nature of COMS (e.g. an e2e slice manager may be used to manager/control a slice subnet for a larger slice). NSaaS and +------------------------------------------+ End-to-end | Network Slice Tenant | Network +-+----------------------------------------+ Slice | Requests a NSaaS Service Management | ^ +-v----------------------------------------+ | | Network Slice Service Provider | | +-+----------------------------------------+ | | Generates an end-to-end Slice Model | | | +-v----------------------------------------+ ^ | | E2e slice manager (COMS model) | | | +-+----------------------------------------+ | NS | | Decomposed by End-to-end | Layer | | Network Slice Manager | | +-v----------------------------------------+ | ------------|Slice controllers (COMS model for subnets)| | | | (may include multiple controllers) | | v +----+---------------+---------------+-----+ v Tech-specific | | | Network Slice | | | Management +------v------+ +------v------+ +------v------+ and | Network | | Network | | Network | Implementation |Configuration| |Configuration| |Configuration| | Model I | | Model II | | Model III | +-------------+ +-------------+ +-------------+ And to match it, here is some input for figure 1: +----------------------------------------------------------+ | Network Slice as a Service | | +-------------------------------------+ +--------------+ | | | Network Slice Template | | | | | | +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ | | Customized | | | | | 5G | | Internet| |Verticals| | | Network Slice| | | | | centric | | VPN | |Industry | | | | | | | +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ | | | | | +-------------------------------------+ +----+---------+ | | | | | | | | | | +------v----------------------------v----+ | | | Network Slice Service Profile | | | +----------------+-----------------------+ | | | | +----------------------------------------------------------+ | +---------v----------+ | End-to-end | +------------+ Slice Manager +--------------+ | +---------+----------+ | | | | | | | +----v----+ +--------------v-----------------+ +-----v----+ | RAN | | Network Slice Controller | | CN | | Slice | | | | Slice | | Ctrlr | +--------+----------+---------+-++ | Ctrlr | +---------+ | | | | | +----------+ +---+ | | | +----------+ | | | | | +------+-----+ +----+----+ +---+----+ +--+--------+ +-+--------+ |Connectivity| |Computing| | Storage| |Generalized| | Nw Slice | | | | | | | |Functions | | Ctrlr | +------------+ +---------+ +--------+ +-----------+ +----------+ Best Regards, Xavier.
- [Netslices] Input for problem statement De Foy, Xavier
- Re: [Netslices] Input for problem statement Liang GENG
- Re: [Netslices] Input for problem statement Xavier de Foy