Re: PANET side-meeting

"Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com> Fri, 08 February 2013 15:41 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana@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 251CA21F8A99 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 07:41:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 9QGfY6uwocip for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 07:41:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A8921F8A80 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 07:41:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4497; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1360338100; x=1361547700; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Eh6qebAWVR2FxaAtMWvA5E2QpXJ2JZb/Sn6zseF0aOE=; b=e7AYWmuHyXUGeAdNQZpd41kbDkVi5l1/6pYQKMsU3x1UBKHQ0/tjZZQK LC63rJWvpjY6L73XH9AAU9aKrcaxWSIZHzSNNfHL3aJPFEEx4a+Kc3HRO dg2aHbIx/OVs6eQUJBGWos1It2Oi18j6Rm2g/resXTKNq4jDttGAFj2KE o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAH0bFVGtJV2c/2dsb2JhbABFwRIWc4IfAQEBAwEBAQEaHS4GCwUHBAIBCBEEAQEBHgkHJwsUCQgCBA4FCQsHh3AGDMAcjRQRg1ZhA5JqgzqBHY81gwCBbw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,630,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="174997660"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2013 15:41:39 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com [173.37.183.77]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r18FfdqK007434 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Feb 2013 15:41:39 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.9.174]) by xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com ([173.37.183.77]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 09:41:39 -0600
From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>
To: "Eric Osborne (eosborne)" <eosborne@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: PANET side-meeting
Thread-Topic: PANET side-meeting
Thread-Index: AQHOBctWqBu9VUeRrkmt2fY4/yliWZhwcRUA//+o5fM=
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 15:41:38 +0000
Message-ID: <B19E95F7-37CA-49DD-8D27-158BB03FCF2B@cisco.com>
References: <201302072244.r17Mi3Og002450@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> <6B5386C5-F507-417F-94E8-0E4B6446FFA8@tony.li> <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E732AFF460@nkgeml508-mbx.china.huawei.com>, <20ECF67871905846A80F77F8F4A27572100C0A1C@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <20ECF67871905846A80F77F8F4A27572100C0A1C@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>, Susan Hares <susan.hares@huawei.com>
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 15:41:41 -0000

No, there won't be a side meeting in Orlando.

However, we secured more time (than the regular 90 min) for rtgwg so that we can have a discussion there.

Alia and I will send out more details (objectives, ground rules, etc.) soon.

Thanks!

Alvaro.

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 8, 2013, at 9:53 AM, "Eric Osborne (eosborne)" <eosborne@cisco.com> wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg