Re: [Supa] Comments on draft-contreras-supa-yang-network-topo-00
Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Wed, 01 October 2014 12:31 UTC
Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: supa@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: supa@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05B571A0330 for <supa@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 05:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.687
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.687 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jZPYVP0pdQUR for <supa@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 05:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [83.241.162.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63E0E1A0296 for <supa@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 05:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (173-38-208-169.cisco.com [173.38.208.169]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 62E8B1280BD3; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 14:31:10 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 14:31:09 +0200
Message-Id: <20141001.143109.1986696969232543149.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <C0E0A32284495243BDE0AC8A066631A8185A90E5@szxeml557-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <C0E0A32284495243BDE0AC8A066631A8185A6B80@szxeml557-mbs.china.huawei.com> <C0E0A32284495243BDE0AC8A066631A8185A90E5@szxeml557-mbs.china.huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 23.4 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/supa/M3hCV7KTIHMaVtcz1AwMU7UJukc
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 17:47:12 -0700
Cc: luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com, andrew.qu@mediatek.com, supa@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Supa] Comments on draft-contreras-supa-yang-network-topo-00
X-BeenThere: supa@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This list is to discuss SUPA \(Shared Unified Policy Automation\) related issues." <supa.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/supa>, <mailto:supa-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/supa/>
List-Post: <mailto:supa@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:supa-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/supa>, <mailto:supa-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 12:31:14 -0000
Hi, Tina TSOU <Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com> wrote: > Dear Martin, > > We discussed off-line how the supa topology draft is related to the > i2rs topology draft, I feel it is worthy to bring it to the list for > broader audience. > > This draft > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hares-i2rs-info-model-service-topo/ I was also thinking about this draft: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-clemm-netmod-yang-network-topo-01.txt ... which I now realize was posted as not as i2rs, but netmod. /martin > also focused on network topology information model which is also > within the scope of SUPA topology model. However, besides the common > interests at topology model, there are still significant differences > between the two. > > 1. The I2RS topology model is based on a service topology which is > closely related to certain service. And the service topology can be > dedicated to one tenant or multiple tenants. For SUPA, different > layers have different views or representations of the same network > topology. Multiple users may not "share" the same topology but use > their own topology at their own layer. > > > > 2. The I2RS topology model use service topologies which should be > independent from network topology and therefore should not map onto > other underlay topologies. The SUPA topology model is a unified > topology model to support service at all levels. Each level can have > its own representation of the topology. > > > 3. There is no YANG based topology model in this I2RS draft yet. SUPA > has a well defined YANG data model to describe the topology. > > All in all, the two drafts have something in common and the basic > principals are very close. IMO, service topology can be one use case > for SUPA topology model to be used in BGP, OSPF and so on. > > > Thank you, > Tina > > From: Supa [mailto:supa-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tina TSOU > Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 12:30 PM > To: LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO; andrew.qu@mediatek.com > Cc: supa@ietf.org > Subject: [Supa] Comments on draft-contreras-supa-yang-network-topo-00 > > Dear Luis, Andrew et al, > > Thank you for writing such a concrete model. > > I read > draft-contreras-supa-yang-network-topo-00<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-contreras-supa-yang-network-topo/>. It > is well written. Below are some comments. > > The basic idea of this draft is very good, and I can understand what > the author tries to say. However still, more clarification is needed > especially for some definitions. > > 1. In section 4.2, there are "virtual node" and "container node", > what is difference between these two kinds of nodes? For the virtual > node, it is more understandable that it is the virtualization of the > physical node or nodes. But for the container node, it can be a group > of nodes or only one node. What is the necessity to define such a > container node, is it domain specific or a general idea for all the > use cases? > > > > 2. Would you elaborate one use case for the container node? In order > to demonstrate the insufficiency of virtual node to cover the > application or use cases, show one use case that the container node > idea is necessary. > > > 3. In section 4.2, there is also some external links or nodes > definition, what is the purpose for that? Are they external for the > user or the up level controller? > > > 4. In first figure of section 4 > +-------------------------+ > | | > | topology | > | | > +-+-+----+---------+--+-+-+ > | | | | | | > | | | | | | > | | | | | | > | | | | | | > +------------+ | | | | | > | | | | | +------------------+ > | +-----+ | | +--------+ | > | | | +-+ | | > | | | | | | > +--+---+ +--+---+ +----+------++---+---+ +---+---+ +-----+-----+ > |link | |node | |termination||extLink| |extNode| |extTerminat| > +------+ +------+ |Point |+-------+ +-------+ |ionPoint | > +-----------+ +-----------+ > > How can the unified topology be mapped into different applications or > users? I guess you need to map this topology, if this is the only one > topology, to different applications in order to make it work. > > > Thank you, > Tina >
- [Supa] Comments on draft-contreras-supa-yang-netw… Tina TSOU
- Re: [Supa] Comments on draft-contreras-supa-yang-… Tina TSOU
- Re: [Supa] Comments on draft-contreras-supa-yang-… LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO
- Re: [Supa] Comments on draft-contreras-supa-yang-… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] Comments on draft-contreras-supa-yang-… Martin Bjorklund