Re: [nmrg] Updating draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-network-definitions-00

[Sheng Jiang <[e-mail]>]

>> One comments: the current definition of autonomic network looks vague.
>> May I propose to modify it: a network which employs autonomic functions
>> network-wide.
>
>Thanks for the suggestion Sheng. Well, I think the definition is recursive, and
>actually DOES reflect what you're suggesting, because it says:
>
>      <t>Autonomic Network: A network containing autonomic nodes.</t>
>and
>      <t>Autonomic Node: A node which employs autonomic functions. It
>may
>      operate on any layer of the networking stack. Examples are routers,
>      switches, personal computers, call managers, etc.</t>
>
>The only thing that's not covered is the "network wide". But that's also not
>necessarily true, because an autonomic function could well span only a few
>devices.

Hi, Michael,

The point is how much scale of autonomic function can be called an autonomic network. Say, if there is a network with hundreds devices, two of these devices has been deployed some autonomic functions. Can the network be claimed as an autonomic network? "Network wide" does not mean every devices. It means a large portion of the network have autonomic functions.

>We could change the Autonomic Function definition to (last sentence added):
>
>      <t>Autonomic Function: A function which requires no configuration,
>and
>      can derive all required information either through self-knowledge,
>discovery
>      or through intent. Typically an autonomic function spans several
>nodes.</t>
>
>What do you think? I'm a bit in between "yes, this is more precise", and "this
>doesn't add much value and complicates things". Slight tendency to agree to
>add it.

This is helpful. But it does not address my concern regarding to the autonomic network definition.

Regards,

Sheng

>Thoughts?
>
>Michael
>
>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Sheng