Re: [Supa] SUPA Update

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Hi Diego,

Thanks for the discussion.
So you're applying the SUPA data model 
(draft-ietf-supa-generic-policy-data-model-04) 
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-supa-generic-policy-data-model/>?
Can you please share how you reuse them and what's your experience?

Regards, Benoit
> Hi Benoit,
>
> In the CogNet project (http://www.cognet.5g-ppp.eu) we are applying 
> the data models to express the policy rules (and the events and 
> actions) derived from the application of the so-called Smart Engine. 
> We are discussing about following a similar path in SHIELD 
> (https://www.shield-h2020.eu) to express security policies, and 
> advocating for it in 5G-TRANSFORMER (http://5g-transformer.eu) when 
> expressing rules for policy-based management. The results of these 
> projects are being or will be transferred to our operational 
> practices, as well as what is being defined in I2NSF, where SUPA seems 
> the natural data model for expressing policies to the Security Controller.
>
> Is tis the kind of statement you were asking for?
>
> Be goode,
>
>> On 22 Jun 2017, at 07:58 , Benoit Claise <[e-mail] 
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Diego,
>>
>> Can you expand on the re-usability aspects.
>> What is being reused? the information model, the data model, 
>> something else? I hope more than the concepts.
>> What are you, yourself, reusing?
>>
>> Regards, Benoit
>>> Hi Benoit,
>>>
>>> While I cannot talk for YANG module authors, and it is true that the 
>>> WG has a significant delay in its deliverables, I ‘d like to stress 
>>> that SUPA has produced reusable work that is being used elsewhere, 
>>> and a closing of the group before it finishes its commitments would 
>>> damage these other works. I am directly involved in the I2NSF WG 
>>> (that is progressing quite well in my opinion), and in several 
>>> collaborative European projects related with 5G and security, 
>>> including a number of network operators that are experimenting with 
>>> SUPA-based policy statements. And I am aware of the ONUG interest as 
>>> well, though not being involved I cannot detail what they are 
>>> targeting now.
>>>
>>> So I would ask you to reconsider the decision of closing SUPA at 
>>> IETF 99.
>>>
>>> Be goode,
>>>
>>>> On 15 Jun 2017, at 14:46 , Benoit Claise <[e-mail] 
>>>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> After the last IETF, I put a calendar reminder on June 16th to 
>>>> decide on the next steps for SUPA.
>>>> This is inline with the our previous meeting minutes, so it should 
>>>> not come as a surprise.
>>>> Granted, this is one day earlier than foreseen, but the IESG agenda 
>>>> coordination call takes place today, and it was important from a 
>>>> scheduling point of view to understand if SUPA would meet. The 
>>>> chairs informed me that no SUPA meeting is required in Prague. That 
>>>> triggered this discussion, just one day earlier.
>>>>
>>>> Our meeting minutes: 
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/supa/current/msg01612.html
>>>>
>>>>     At the SUPA WG at IETF 98 (Tuesday, 28 March) we discussed the
>>>>     progress of the WG.  Benoit (our AD) summed up the situation, pointing
>>>>     out that our drafts are not updated very frequently, and that the SUPA
>>>>     mailing list has been very quiet between meetings.
>>>>
>>>>     At the meeting the authors of the SUPA Information model and the SUPA
>>>>     Data Model drafts said that those drafts should be ready for WG Last
>>>>     Call by 1 June, so that they could be sent to IESG for approval by
>>>>     about 1 July.
>>>>
>>>>     After summing up the pros and cons for SUPA continuing, Benoit
>>>>     concluded by saying that the WG will be closed at IETF 99 (Prague, 16
>>>>     July) unless there is substantive progress on the Information Model
>>>>     and especially on the Data Model drafts by one month before the Prague
>>>>     meeting.  'Substantive progress' here means seeing comments on and/or
>>>>     reviews of these drafts demonstrating that people - outside the small
>>>>     group of authors - have carefully read the drafts, or better, that they
>>>>     are actually using SUPA's Information and Data Models.
>>>>
>>>> I've been watching the list.
>>>> Since the last IETF meeting, we received two new drafts ...
>>>>
>>>>     draft-ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model-03.txt
>>>>     draft-ietf-supa-generic-policy-data-model-03.txt
>>>>
>>>> ... and some draft reviews:
>>>>
>>>>         [e-mail] on on
>>>>         draft-ietf-supa-policy-based-management-framework:
>>>>
>>>>             Good feedback but it seems like only editorial to me.
>>>>
>>>>         Tony [e-mail] on draft-cheng-supa-applicability:
>>>>
>>>>             Some editorial comments and three technical ones:
>>>>
>>>>             1.       I wonder the meaning of section 3, the part
>>>>             copied from framework draft, may not be needed.
>>>>
>>>>             2.       I suggest to replace the title of 4.2.2.and
>>>>             4.2.3 with detailed information instead of writing just
>>>>               Example 1 / 2.
>>>>
>>>>             3.       The writer wrote “We will define
>>>>             "edgeInterface" role and "EnterpriseDomain" later in
>>>>              this note” but I failed to find the explanation for
>>>>             these two term.
>>>>
>>>>             Benoit => it's more like one technical comment, the
>>>>             last one.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         Haining Wang: [e-mail] on
>>>>         draft-ietf-supa-generic-policy-data-model-03:
>>>>
>>>>             I understand that the GPIM YANG model provides an
>>>>             example of how to convert IM to DM (for general
>>>>             policy), and John’s SNMP blocking example
>>>>             (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/supa/DWEzaSBK6KBdsmQ0FE2-eypTzeY)
>>>>             exposes some details. But I am sorry that the whole
>>>>             picture is still not clear to me. It would be nice if
>>>>             the ECA Data Model part can explain in more details.
>>>>
>>>>         March Blanchet on
>>>>         draft-ietf-supa-policy-based-management-framework:
>>>>
>>>>             - larger comment: I’m not sure what to do with this
>>>>             document. It looks like a large wish list of features.
>>>>             I guess I’m probably too used to
>>>>             implementation/protocol details. I guess I will wait
>>>>             until to see the actual protocol/yang models. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Let's analyze the situation:
>>>> I don't consider those reviews (btw a single one the DM, none on 
>>>> the IM) as "substantive progress".
>>>> I don't see interest from YANG module authors, ready to reuse the 
>>>> SUPA YANG constructs.
>>>> Being a year late according to the charter milestones, the window 
>>>> of opportunity to produce reusable work has been closing rapidly.
>>>> I believe that SUPA had multiple chances to make it happen, and 
>>>> failed to deliver.
>>>> With this in mind, I don't see how I should conclude anything else 
>>>> than this WG will be closing at IETF 99.
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Benoit (OPS AD)
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear supa’rs,
>>>>>
>>>>> We have cancelled our formal meeting in Prague. This decision was 
>>>>> taken based on a proposed plan to focus effort on completing the 
>>>>> existing WG items and prepare for closure of the supa working 
>>>>> group sometime between IETF 99 and 100. A plan that is yet to be 
>>>>> approved by Benoit.
>>>>>
>>>>> During the last working group meeting Benoit stated:
>>>>>
>>>>> “the WG will be closed at IETF 99 (Prague, 16 July) unless there 
>>>>> is substantive progress on the Information Model and especially on 
>>>>> the Data Model draft by one month before the Prague meeting.”
>>>>>
>>>>> The authors of the Data Model and Information Model I-Ds did 
>>>>> submit new versions but we only received one review. However, 
>>>>> Nevil and I are working with the IM and DM authors to gather 
>>>>> reviewers in preparation of Last Call. Essentially, we are working 
>>>>> to prep folks who would be able to review the documents we Last 
>>>>> Call, ideally these should be from policy/yang implementers.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Framework I-D has also received a review which is positive, 
>>>>> and I am in the process of reviewing the document myself to also 
>>>>> help prepare the document for Last Call. Additionally, the 
>>>>> Applicability I-D (a non-working group document) received a review 
>>>>> which is also useful.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have also seen notifications from other SDOs following supa, 
>>>>> specifically:
>>>>>
>>>>> - ONUG: Investigating I2NSF combined with the SUPA data model and 
>>>>> framework
>>>>>
>>>>> - ETSI Experiential Networked Intelligence (ENI): New initiative 
>>>>> defining context aware networking systems, SUPA was identified as 
>>>>> a key building block
>>>>>
>>>>> - MEF Open Lifecycle Service Orchestrator (LSO): Using SUPA 
>>>>> between functional components
>>>>>
>>>>> However, the indication from ONUG, ETSI and MEF does not 
>>>>> materially change the situation of SUPA but it does demonstrate 
>>>>> wider interest in our work, and at least some responsibility for 
>>>>> supa/IETF to complete it (if possible). If you are aware of 
>>>>> near-term implementations now is the time to highlight them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, we felt we did not need a WG meeting in Prague to progress 
>>>>> the working group I-Ds, and given the IETF agenda coordination 
>>>>> call (is today) we had to cancel the supa WG session request ASAP, 
>>>>> and unfortunately before we had a chance to communicate the 
>>>>> current situation to the rest of the working group. Apologies for 
>>>>> any surprise when you saw the cancellation notification, and the 
>>>>> lack of opportunity for wider discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> As mentioned our proposed plan has been submitted to Benoit and is 
>>>>> yet to be approved, therefore we will wait for his thoughts and 
>>>>> ultimate decision.
>>>>>
>>>>> The SUPA Chairs would sincerely like to thank everyone for their 
>>>>> participation and especially the authors of I-Ds for their efforts.
>>>>>
>>>>> BR, Nevil and Dan.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SUPA mailing list
>>>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/supa
>>>
>>> --
>>> "Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno"
>>>
>>> Dr Diego R. Lopez
>>> Telefonica I+D
>>> http://people.tid.es/diego.lopez/
>>>
>>> e-mail: [e-mail]
>>> Tel:    [phone]
>>> Mobile: [phone]
>>> ----------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su 
>>> destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial 
>>> y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es 
>>> usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, 
>>> utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar 
>>> prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este 
>>> mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente 
>>> por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.
>>>
>>> The information contained in this transmission is privileged and 
>>> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual 
>>> or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the 
>>> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
>>> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly 
>>> prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not 
>>> read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have 
>>> received this communication in error and then delete it.
>>>
>>> Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu 
>>> destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e 
>>> é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é 
>>> vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a 
>>> leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode 
>>> estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta 
>>> mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por 
>>> esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição
>>
>
> --
> "Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno"
>
> Dr Diego R. Lopez
> Telefonica I+D
> http://people.tid.es/diego.lopez/
>
> e-mail: [e-mail]
> Tel:    [phone]
> Mobile: [phone]
> ----------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su 
> destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y 
> es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es 
> usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, 
> utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar 
> prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este 
> mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por 
> esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.
>
> The information contained in this transmission is privileged and 
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual 
> or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the 
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. 
> If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. 
> Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this 
> communication in error and then delete it.
>
> Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu 
> destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é 
> para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa 
> senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, 
> utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida 
> em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, 
> rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e 
> proceda a sua destruição