Re: [Nfvrg] Make Intent network to be practical //Re: [Ibnemo] Feedback on Nemo Status

[Zhoutianran <[e-mail]>]

That is a good revision.
I just provide minor corrections.

Thanks,
Terence

From: Susan Hares [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 4:54 AM
To: Zhoutianran; Xiayinben
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Make Intent network to be practical //Re: [Ibnemo] Feedback on Nemo Status

Tianran:
I like the addition.  Your write-up is very precise and scholarly.  I found it very important that the Nemo design has entity, capability, and model requirements.  The clear break down into 3 components is critical to try to define a minimal language set.  I’m still reaching other previous language sets (from Andrew and Huub). However, this write-up was to be a bit less academic.  Do you think this provides this balance.
 Sue
Academic:

[1] Technical this is 3 the following basic groups:

・        entity group: node/unnode, link/unlink, flow/unflow

・        capabilities: policy/unpolicym, query, notification, connect, disconnect, commit, withdraw

・        model: Node Model, Link Model, and Link statement.


Within these groups are 16 statements, and 38 key works (E.g. Endnodes, properties)
Non-Academic:
NEMO project provides a simple transaction based Intent-based NBI, enabling applications to create, modify and take down virtual networks built on virtual nodes with policy-controlled flows

・        4 network commands: Node, Link, Flow, Policy,

・        6 controller communication commands: connect, disconnect, transact, commit, notification, query

・        3 Modeling commands: Node Model, Link Model, and Flow Model.[1]
An application exchanges NEMO language commands (often as a script) over  the REST Protocol to a controller running a language processing engine to instruct the controller to set up a virtual network of nodes and connections with flow policy to control the data flows across the network links.

From: Zhoutianran [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 3:46 AM
To: Susan Hares; Xiayinben
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Make Intent network to be practical //Re: [Ibnemo] Feedback on Nemo Status

Hi Sue,
Good job for this write up. It’s a great review for existing intent related work.
I attached a patch for part of the revision.

Best Regards,
Terence

From: Susan Hares [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 2:50 AM
To: Xiayinben; Zhoutianran
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Make Intent network to be practical //Re: [Ibnemo] Feedback on Nemo Status

Yinben:
I agree that the most important thing is to make the Intent based work practical based on real use cases.   I will write-up my collection of real-world use case people have shared with me.
To talk about these use cases,  we need a clear way to discuss intent.  I think the draft on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xia-ibnemo-icim/ is a good start to discuss the definition of Intent.   I will start a thread to discuss I think understanding Intent is important.
Based on your input and Tianran’s I have updated my overview of the Intent based landscape I’m working on for a industry forum.  I’ve attached it. I would appreciate if you would review it and let me know what you think.
Sue Hares



From: Xiayinben [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 4:33 AM
To: Zhoutianran; Susan Hares
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Make Intent network to be practical //Re: [Ibnemo] Feedback on Nemo Status

Hope this can be a initial point to clarify the scope and composition of intent network.
Let’s make intent to be a practical technology rather than a marketing buzzword.
Yinben
发件人: Ibnemo [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表 Zhoutianran
发送时间: 2015年5月26日 15:21
收件人: Susan Hares
抄送: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
主题: Re: [Ibnemo] Feedback on Nemo Status

Hi Sue,
Thanks for your write up.
The attached figure shows my consideration on how to coordinate intent related work.
In IETF, I think we can work on:

l  Use case for intent networking

l  Intent definition

l  Gap analysis to other working groups in IETF

l  Intent network models

l  Intent description language facilitating intent expression
And we can discuss all these topics in this mailing list.
Then we can implement the intent engine and the protocol related to the controller NBI in open source projects, e.g. OpenDaylight.

Best Regards,
Terence
From: Susan Hares [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 4:25 AM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: Zhoutianran; Xiayinben
Subject: Feedback on Nemo Status

I was asked to provide an overview for the Cablelabs write-up for their MSO.   Does this write-up capture the Nemo work?

Sue Hares

--------------
NeMo provides a simple transaction based Intent-based NBI, enabling applications to creat, modify and takedown virtual networks built on virtual nodes with policy-controlled flows. The NeMo Intent NBI allows an application to communicate with a controller, providing 10 commands:


・        4 network commands: Node, Link, Flow, Policy

・        6 controller communication commands: connect, disconnect, transact, commit, notification, query
An application exchanges NeMo commands using the REST Protocol to a controller running a Nemo language processing engine to instruct the controller to set up a virtual network of nodes and links with flow policy to control the data flows across the network links.
NeMo uses an application’s view of the compute, storage, and network to allow an application to set any grouping of compute, storage, or network as a virtual ‘node’. This allows the application to decide what constitutes a compute node and what constitute a ‘link’ and a ‘flow’.  From the application’s viewpoint, it intends to connect two or more nodes in a network.  It does not matter to the application if the node is a single virtual machine (VM) or a cluster of interconnected compute and storage devices with many network connections. NeMo’s NBI API hides this complexity, making the application’s commands prescriptive and simple.   Nemo’s
Nemo’s language engine in the controller is associated with a model that allows a group of applications to have a set of pre-loaded defintions (model sematics) for nodes, flows, or policy.  For example, a company nodes could be defined along with the necessary flows for accounting traffic or big-data transfers.

Technically, Nemo is a declarative, domain specific policy language.

Status and Relevance

Nemo has open source projects in:

・        Open Daylight (https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:NEMO)

Goals of ODL project:

o   Design and develop consistent NBI models and patterns for intent networks.

o   Design the syntax for a language style NBI.

o   Design and develop a NEMO language engine for language parsing and model mapping to SB models. It is possible to reuse the ongoing NIC project in OpenDaylight for the intent manager and model mapping component

・        OPNFV (Movie)

Goals:

o   Provide a more abstract NBI alternative by extending the general cloud platform to simplify the orchestrator and VNF manager

o   Compose various scenarios with a same set of abstractions

o   Use the MDA approach for NBI consistency and interface automation


・        IB-Nemo Pre-BOF in the IETF (www.nemo-project.net<http://www.nemo-project.net>)

o   Mail list: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

Goals:

o   Focus on a clear definition of Intent that can be operationalized in networks,

§  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xia-ibnemo-icim/

o   Define use cases scenarios for Nemo,

o   Provide a gap analysis for other work in the IETF, and

o   Standardize a protocol language for Nemo

§  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xia-sdnrg-nemo-language/

§  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xia-sdnrg-nemo-language/

o   Standardize data models to provide

§  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhou-netmod-intent-nemo/


________________________________

________________________________

[1] Technical this is 3 the following basic groups:

・        entity group: node/unnode, link/unlink, flow/unflow

・        capabilities: policy/unpolicym, query, notification, connect, disconnect, commit, withdraw

・        Model: Node Model, Link Model, and Link statement.



Within these groups are 16 statements, and 38 key works (E.g. Endnodes, properties)