Re: [Openv6] APONF (Application-based Policy for Network Functions): new BOF for IETF 90 (requesting comments)

Yes, we should discuss and hopefully attend both BOFs to improve
understanding.

I think the point where our ideas touch is one item in the
draft charter that was just circulated:

> * provide mechanisms that can accurately map and store the
> APONF groups/classes of application policies and models into
> existing network management and traffic policies.

This isn't easy, because existing NM and policy mechanisms are
basically a mess. Autonomic Networking would be a *new*
approach to the problem of getting appropriate configuration
into all network elements. There would be a new bullet:

 * provide mechanisms that can accurately map and store the
 APONF groups/classes of application policies and models into
 autonomic networking policy intent, so that autonomic networking
 mechanisms can implement the policies throughout the network.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 10/06/2014 17:16, karagian@cs.utwente.nl wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> In addition to what Cathy answered I would like to mention that yes, it will be good to meet in Toronto and discuss the issues that you mentioned!
> 
> Best regards,
> Georgios
> 
> 
> ________________________________________
> Van: Zhouqian (Cathy) [cathy.zhou@huawei.com]
> Verzonden: dinsdag 10 juni 2014 5:03
> Aan: Brian E Carpenter; Karagiannis, G. (EWI)
> CC: openv6@ietf.org
> Onderwerp: RE: [Openv6] APONF (Application-based Policy for Network Functions): new BOF for IETF 90 (requesting comments)
> 
> Hi Brian,
> 
> Best Regards,
> Cathy
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Openv6 [mailto:openv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Brian E
>> Carpenter
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 4:37 AM
>> To: karagian@cs.utwente.nl
>> Cc: openv6@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [Openv6] APONF (Application-based Policy for Network Functions):
>> new BOF for IETF 90 (requesting comments)
>>
>> Hi Georgios,
>>
>> On 08/06/2014 19:46, karagian@cs.utwente.nl wrote:
>>> Hi Brian,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your comments!
>>>
>>> Regarding the relation to openv6, please note that APONF can be used to
>> support an operator on deploying and configuring (and dynamically
>> reconfiguring) different IPv4/IPv6 transition solutions depending on the applied
>> scenarios and the expected user experience.
>>
>> Yes, that would be one application but I am still confused. I have seen no other
>> traffic on the openv6 list, so what are we doing here? Why isn't this discussion
>> on an APONF list, and where is the actual discussion of openv6?
> 
> Openv6 is one use case of APONF. We already had two side meetings of openv6 in both IETF 88 and IETF 89.
> So we hope to use the expertise in this list to discuss APONF first.
> 
>>> Regarding the relation of APONF to UCAN, to my understanding, the UCAN
>> BOF intends to expose several use cases that are focusing on Autonomic
>> Networking (AN), i.e., self management.
>>> APONF is focusing not focusing on solving AN issues. Please note that the
>> dynamic (re)configuration issues mentioned in the APONF BOF (pre-charter) are
>> not associated with self-management.
>>
>> Actually, any scenario that currently relies on a policy/management function
>> and some kind of automation is a possible use case for autonomic networking. I
>> don't see any of the actions involved in APONF as being out of scope for AN.
>> Application-based policy intent would be considered as an input to the AN
>> mechanisms, and the topics that you have listed as "network management and
>> traffic policies"
>> are exactly the type of objectives we would consider as targets for autonomic
>> negotiation between network elements.
>>
>> The "the application-based policy protocol(s), mechanisms and models"
>> that you mention might be exactly what is needed to communicate between
>> applications and the AN policy mechanism.
> APONF focuses on auto-mapping application's demand on network to the policy that can be understood by network. The applications could be the following ones, e.g., Traffic Engineering, Anti-DDoS, IPv6 transition, etc. These applications are not in the scope of Autonomic Network. One of APONF's objective is to define a set of models for such applications. These models may be used for AN or any other policy based use cases.
> 
> 
>> If both BOFs are approved, we need to discuss in Toronto!
>>
>> Regards,
>>    Brian
>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Georgios
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________________
>>> Van: Brian E Carpenter [brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com]
>>> Verzonden: zaterdag 7 juni 2014 22:39
>>> Aan: Karagiannis, G. (EWI)
>>> CC: openv6@ietf.org
>>> Onderwerp: Re: [Openv6] APONF (Application-based Policy for Network
>>> Functions): new BOF for IETF 90 (requesting comments)
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can you explain the specific relationship between this BOF and IPv6?
>>> As far as I can see, it is 100% independent of the IP version (and
>>> that is a good thing).
>>>
>>> By the way, the topic of autonomic configuration by negotiation
>>> between various network elements, which could include the elements
>>> involved in the APONF scenarios, is the subject of another BOF
>>> proposal, which also has no specific dependency on IPv6:
>>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/WikiStart#UCANproposal
>>> APONF might be an additional use case for UCAN.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>    Brian Carpenter
>>>
>>> On 08/06/2014 06:01, karagian@cs.utwente.nl wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Please note that a request for a BOF associated with Openv6 has been
>> requested for IETF 90.
>>>> The name of this BOF is:
>>>>
>>>> APONF (Application-based Policy for Network Functions).
>>>>
>>>> The main goal of APONF is to specify the application-based policy protocol(s),
>> mechanisms and models required by transport applications to easily, accurately,
>> and efficiently select and use the available communication network capabilities,
>> i.e., network management and/or traffic policies.
>>>> For more details on APONF, please see:
>>>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/#
>>>>
>>>> Please note that in association with this BOF two Internet drafts have been
>> (up to now) submitted .
>>>> These drafts are:
>>>>
>>>> APONF problem statement:
>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-karagiannis-aponf-problem-statement-00
>>>> .txt
>>>>
>>>> APONF architecture:
>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-aponf-architecture-00.txt
>>>>
>>>> Your comments on the APONF BOF, and on the Internet drafts listed above
>> are very much appreciated!
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Georgios Karagiannis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Openv6 mailing list
>>>> Openv6@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openv6
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openv6 mailing list
>> Openv6@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openv6