Network slicing side meeting agenda (tonight 19:00 in Studio 3)

"Dongjie (Jimmy)" <> Tue, 15 November 2016 04:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81D1E12943D; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 20:05:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.718
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.718 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xvI4ruVq6sqj; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 20:05:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C1D4129473; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 20:05:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (EHLO ([]) by (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CVE24399; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 04:05:14 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 04:05:13 +0000
Received: from ([fe80::a54a:89d2:c471:ff]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 12:05:02 +0800
From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <>
To: "" <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Subject: Network slicing side meeting agenda (tonight 19:00 in Studio 3)
Thread-Topic: Network slicing side meeting agenda (tonight 19:00 in Studio 3)
Thread-Index: AQHSPvVwtdq+jMzU/EqkYCqnEHJjpQ==
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 04:05:02 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A0B0201.582A897A.0077, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: a88cb97e93e4220f17a082757e94f008
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 04:05:20 -0000

Dear all,

The network slicing side meeting will be held today 19:00-21:00 in room Studio 3.

Here is the agenda of the meeting:

1. Network slicing problem statement	15 mins
Stewart Bryant

2. Autonomic slice networking	15 mins
Alex Galis

3. Architecture for delivering multicast mobility services using network slicing  15 mins
Truong-Xuan Do

4. ACTN and network slicing	15 mins
Daniele Ceccarelli

5. Open Discussion  60 mins

Best regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: detnet [] On Behalf Of Dongjie (Jimmy)
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 7:57 PM
Cc: Stewart Bryant; Mach Chen
Subject: [Detnet] Network slicing side meeting at IETF97

Dear all,

Following on from the recent discussions on network slicing, it seems useful to have a side meeting during next week's IETF to see if we can establish a common view on the definition and scope of network slicing, what work is currently being undertaken in the IETF on this problem space, and what (if any) new IETF work would be needed to create deployable network solutions.

To that end we propose a side meeting on the topic of network slicing and have got a room to have this discussion on the Tuesday evening of the IETF week.
Meeting Name: 5G Network Slicing Side Meeting Assigned Room: Studio 3 Assigned Date: 11/15/2016 (Tuesday) Assigned Time: 19:00 - 21:00

To make the most of this time, it would be useful if a few of us introduce to the rest our thoughts on the subject before having an open discussion. We have a projector, and so those introducing an aspect of this problem can use slides, but slides are not required.

The topics we have so far are:
1.  Network slicing problem statement  - Stewart Bryant

2.  Autonomic slicing networking  - Alex Galis

3.  Multicast and mobility service on demand with network slicing  - Truong-Xuan Do

If you have experiences/understanding of network slicing related use cases, requirements or problems etc., we welcome their inclusion in the agenda to help bring the rest up to speed.

Following that, we propose an open discussion to establish whether there are work items that we need to get included in any existing IETF WG charter, or whether we need to initiate any new work in the IETF.

If you have comments on our proposed agenda, or you want to introduce an aspect of the problem to the rest of the group, then please contact us with name of the topic and how long you need to talk about it.

Many thanks and best regards,


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stewart Bryant []
> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 11:22 PM
> To:;;; 
> Cc: Mach Chen <>om>; Dongjie (Jimmy) 
> <>
> Subject: Network Slicing - a suggestion that we meet to discuss in 
> Seoul
> Hi,
> We were trying to pull together a problem statement for network 
> slicing in a 5G context to understand how well the current IETF 
> protocols address this problem, what their short comings might be, and 
> what IETF work is necessary to have a deployable protocol suite to address this need.
> We have set down our first thoughts in
> nt-00
> We find that there are a number of groups doing similar work 
> throughout the IETF.
> The following comprehensive draft was directed at the ANIMA WG 
> working/
> is a detailed discussion the position of network slicing in a contest 
> of next generation networks
> 00 looks at multicasting in a sliced context
> and
> looks at slicing in a context of traffic engineering.
> Our thoughts are that network slicing spans a number of deployment 
> scenarios, and has a number of diverse applications, ranging from 
> fragile applications, through to providing enhanced security and availability.
> Elements of the problem and the resultant solution have a close 
> affinity to DETNET. There is clearly an affinity with VPN 
> technologies, although none of the existing VPNs provide the degree of isolation that we think is required.
> We note that there seems to be no natural home for all of the aspects 
> of this problem.
> It therefore seems that if would be a good idea for those interested 
> in this problem to get together at some point during IETF to swap 
> notes and share our views on the problem space and how to move forward with addressing it.
> Is there any interest in meeting up to discuss this in Seoul?
> Best regards
> Stewart/Mach/Jie

detnet mailing list