RE: PANET side-meeting

"Eric Osborne (eosborne)" <eosborne@cisco.com> Fri, 08 February 2013 14:53 UTC

Return-Path: <eosborne@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97FC921F8A4F for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 06:53:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.945
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.945 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.654, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VLQJEHGUt7cR for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 06:53:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E5F21F87F6 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 06:53:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3853; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1360335206; x=1361544806; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=8UujEIz4J5YEQXV+Bnh3ANXmoEmdgPmwzD1KBzu5wSQ=; b=bJ9panRbEEMt5C7b/DMTxp4Cq+ByGbc4JTu0sLUUyo/ChUvtqalorNNv BeiU6xIaftzhvxh/e1F+wo4Q+GQR82eHx2mxMxqgiIJ9axV/IM3tvnx1B TBNCfRh5Y+ntlhvj4IxwHAHYAI8kbXJFSRjh8x+MbrXEuM3gbHiy+zQz1 g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAL8QFVGtJV2a/2dsb2JhbABFwRIWc4IfAQEBBAEBARodLgYLDAQCAQgRBAEBAQoUCQcnCxQJCAIEAQ0FCAELB4d2DMBijRQRg1ZhA5JqhFePNYMAgW81
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,629,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="174931397"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2013 14:53:25 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com [173.37.183.76]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r18ErPBq029078 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Feb 2013 14:53:25 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.149]) by xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com ([173.37.183.76]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 08:53:25 -0600
From: "Eric Osborne (eosborne)" <eosborne@cisco.com>
To: Mingui Zhang <zhangmingui@huawei.com>, Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>, "curtis@occnc.com" <curtis@occnc.com>
Subject: RE: PANET side-meeting
Thread-Topic: PANET side-meeting
Thread-Index: AQHOBctWUr8UpBPq1UixHTNAwDsanphwDFcg
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 14:53:24 +0000
Message-ID: <20ECF67871905846A80F77F8F4A27572100C0A1C@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
References: <201302072244.r17Mi3Og002450@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> <6B5386C5-F507-417F-94E8-0E4B6446FFA8@tony.li> <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E732AFF460@nkgeml508-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E732AFF460@nkgeml508-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.98.23.84]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Susan Hares <susan.hares@huawei.com>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtgwg>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 14:53:30 -0000

Will this side meeting be in Orlando?  I'm sceptical of some of the current approaches but am very interested in where they might go.





eric

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Mingui Zhang
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 2:10 AM
> To: Tony Li; curtis@occnc.com
> Cc: Susan Hares; rtgwg@ietf.org
> Subject: PANET side-meeting
> 
> Hi Tony and Curtis,
> 
> Let me retrospect some history to clear up the chaos floating around.
> 
> On Feb 4th, I organized a conference call among a dozen of guys (from
> operators, vendors and Universities) who are interested in PANET, in order to
> prepare for a side meeting in IETF. There was a rough consensus that a side-
> meeting is a good way to call for interest, coordination and contribution to
> PANET. However, requests was _prematurely_ sent out afterwards, without
> including all the effort from the conference attendees. I hope this email can get
> us back on track. So I change its title.
> 
> I believe the most efficient way for us is to play the game according to the rule
> of IETF/IRTF. Therefore, we are trying to find a place to accommodate the side-
> meeting. We should not delve into discussion of specific solutions before we
> make clear the problem scope. A charter should be published, which will help
> us figure out what is the problem we are trying to solve. Before that, let me
> add some pointers of drafts from my side. I believe these drafts can also help
> people to figure out the scope of PANET.
> Power-Aware Networks (PANET): Problem Statement,
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhang-panet-problem-statement/
> Use Cases for Power-Aware Networks, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
> zhang-panet-use-cases/
> Requirements for Power Aware Network,
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-panet-requirement/
> 
> On the 84th IETF rtgwg f2f meeting, there were two presentations relevant to
> greening. I also list them as follows FYI.
> A Framework and Requirements for Energy Aware Control Planes,
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-retana-rtgwg-eacp-00, [slides]
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/slides/slides-84-rtgwg-3.pptx
> Power-aware Routing and Traffic Engineering: Requirements, Approaches, and
> Issues, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhang-greennet/, [slides]
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/slides/slides-84-rtgwg-4.pptx
> 
> Thanks,
> Mingui Zhang
> Huawei Technologies
> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> >Of Tony Li
> >Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 7:02 AM
> >To: curtis@occnc.com
> >Cc: Shankar Raman M J; rtgwg@ietf.org
> >Subject: Re: Power aware networks : Comments requested from routing
> >community
> >
> >
> >On Feb 7, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't think this is even material ready for IRTF consideration, but
> >> that is up to Tony and IRTF to decide.
> >
> >
> >As always, the IRTF does not require well-formed ideas as a
> >pre-requisite for starting work.  Instead, there needs to be a clear
> >problem statement (i.e., a
> >charter) and a sufficient group of serious researchers who are
> >committed to following through in a committed manner.
> >
> >Note that it is, by definition, research.  It is expected to have a
> >non-trivial likelihood of failure.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Tony
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >rtgwg mailing list
> >rtgwg@ietf.org
> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg