Re: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Thank you very much!

Jun

-----Original Message-----
From: openv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:openv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
karagian@cs.utwente.nl
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 4:23 AM
To: junbi@tsinghua.edu.cn; tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com; openv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Hi Ji,

Than ks for your suggestions!
We will change the following terms:

Network Management Application" to "Network Service" 

Network Management Application System" to "Network Service System" 

Best regards,
Georgios

________________________________________
Van: Jun Bi [junbi@tsinghua.edu.cn]
Verzonden: donderdag 24 juli 2014 17:22
Aan: 'Tom Taylor'; Karagiannis, G. (EWI); openv6@ietf.org
Onderwerp: RE: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

I have a suggestion to change the terminology.

For figure 1 on page 4, the "end user application" is not a good term.

I noticed that the figure in the latest PPT from Georgios and Tina, " end
user application" was changed to "network service". I think it is good.

So one page 5 of APONF problem statement draft:

"Network Management Application: Operational Support System (OSS) like
applications that help a communication service provider to monitor, control,
analyze and manage a communication network."

Could we change " Network Management Application" to "Network Service", to
be consist with the latest figure ?

In addition, may I propose we also change "Network Management Application
System" to "Network Service System" ?

Change the definition "Network management application systems: Systems or
platforms that run the network management application."
To
"Network Service Systems: Systems or platforms that run the network
service."

Best Regards,
Jun Bi

-----Original Message-----
From: openv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:openv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Tom Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 6:26 PM
To: karagian@cs.utwente.nl; openv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Openv6] new APONF goals based on APONF bar BOF meeting

Follow-up below, expressing my understanding of further details agreed last
night.

On 14-07-22 05:13 PM, karagian@cs.utwente.nl wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> To be informed!
>
> Please note that this version is modified based on the comments that 
> we received yesterday during the bar BOF meeting.
>
...

Procedurally: when a new service is defined, the Network Management (NM)
Application function downloads an initial network service graph to the NM
Control function. The data includes triggers for NM Control to feed back
updates to the graph. When one of these triggers is engaged, NM Control
sends back a refreshed network service graph.

Discussion Point 1: I am trying to relate this to SFC as a service. The
starting point is the Service Function Chain. This has to be translated into
one or more instances of a Service Function Path, which get passed to the
Service Classifier. Path derivation is logically something NM Control would
be responsible for. Which APONF function would be responsible for
distributing the path information to the Classifier(s)?

Discussion Point 2: to do its mapping between information gathered from
Network Elements (NE) and the network service graphs, NM Control needs a
database associating NE-provided attributes with service-specific labels.
Would downloading of such a dictionary be part of APONF responsibilities, or
would we leave creation of the database to be an operator-specific matter?

I stand to be corrected on my basic understanding of APONF operation, and
welcome comments on the discussion points.

Tom Taylor

_______________________________________________
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