Re: [Supa] SUPA questions
Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Wed, 04 February 2015 16:47 UTC
Return-Path: <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
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 BB0BF1A8AE6 for <supa@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 08:47:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.26
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.26 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 IORTKq1g5vST for <supa@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 08:47:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de (atlas3.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C7331A1A8A for <supa@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 08:47:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC3151CCD; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 17:47:06 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from atlas3.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.220]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id edf9PeJkQMGW; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 17:46:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hermes.jacobs-university.de", Issuer "Jacobs University CA - G01" (verified OK)) by atlas3.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 17:47:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.47]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3D8B20036; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 17:47:05 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius2.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IOmRMyMRFrb7; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 17:39:00 +0100 (CET)
Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C79482003A; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 17:47:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id F21F43184CF7; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 17:47:03 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 17:47:03 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <20150204164703.GB10742@elstar.local>
Mail-Followup-To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>, "supa@ietf.org" <supa@ietf.org>, "ops-ads@tools.ietf.org" <ops-ads@tools.ietf.org>, "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" <rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org>
References: <54CF8F4D.4010002@cisco.com> <9E366C09-44E7-41A9-B30D-96435C3BEE82@viagenie.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <9E366C09-44E7-41A9-B30D-96435C3BEE82@viagenie.ca>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/supa/aIKghq1cwD_n2RkNvlF7F2ddYkQ>
Cc: "ops-ads@tools.ietf.org" <ops-ads@tools.ietf.org>, "supa@ietf.org" <supa@ietf.org>, "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" <rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Supa] SUPA questions
X-BeenThere: supa@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
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, 04 Feb 2015 16:47:10 -0000
On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 11:38:37AM -0500, JF Tremblay wrote: > > > > Same question as during the bar BoF: what is the connection with I2RS in terms of topology? > > When I spoke to Alia Atlas some months ago, she mentioned that the topology would be done in I2RS. > > Right. Alia said I2RS was willing to continue this work, but: > - This wasn’t discussed in Hawaii (it wasn’t on the agenda and draft-clemm-i2rs-yang-network-topo-01 was expired at that time) > - There’s been very little discussions on this topic on the I2RS list for the past year. > > The good news is that topology work is on the agenda for the I2RS interim next Thursday (see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/i2rs/trac/wiki/TopologyDesignTeams <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/i2rs/trac/wiki/TopologyDesignTeams>). Supa participants are willing to re-use the work of other groups such as I2RS, as long as a timely completion envisioned. > It seems that having means to express topologies at various layers is essential if we want to move from managing devices to managing networks. For me, having a clear notion how we look at topologies is as essential has having a clear notion how we look at interfaces when we write device data models. I2RS has topology work in their charter because they need to work with routing topology. SUPA has topology work in their charter draft because they need to work with network topologies and service toplogies. I think there is topology work in some below IP working groups as well. I hope that the IESG looks into this issue and finds a way to address it. One option could be to create a tightly focused short lived WG that comes up with a generic topology model and to revise other WG charters such that they work with the result produced by the WG. There sure are other options one could consider/try. But I believe some leadership action is needed here. I assume SUPA will be happy to work with any solution the IESG seems to be appropriate to address the need for topology data models. But until there is a clear path, we thought to keep it in the charter as an indication of "we need this" (and it helps to get IESG member attention for this issue I guess). > > Questions on the charter (next to the ones I asked above) > > - It seems that you discuss multiple use cases in different drafts but I don't see any in the charter as deliverable? Yes, we will fix that. > > How would you know if you are successful? > > On the other hand, I see in the charter text: > > The first use case that the working group will focus on will be VPN > > inter-datacenter traffic management, including the automated > > provisioning of site-to-site virtual private networks (VPNs) of > > various types (for example IPsec, tunnels, MPLS L2 and L3). > > "VPN, IPSEC, tunneles, MPLS L2 or L3", they look to me as multiple use cases, at least multiple distinct technolgies, and therefore as a huge piece of work The idea was to try to be as much as possible agnostic to the VPN technology. You think this won't be feasible? > > - "A set of policy rules is then defined to manage the service" > > I don't know what you mean by "policy rules"? A new language? A set of YANG models, depending on the use case (Policy-based routing, QoS rate-limiting policy, ACL drop policy, etc...), something else? > > The policy side is also unclear to me. But again, this would be a high-level top-down approach. I like what’s described in draft-hares-i2rs-info-model-policy-02 (and the related presentation at http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/90/slides/slides-90-i2rs-2.pdf <http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/90/slides/slides-90-i2rs-2.pdf>), but again, that’s an I2RS document. > I think the idea is that policy is expressed via a data model, not via a new language. Some of the infrastructure should be generic (e.g. binding a policy to date/time) but then there will be specific extensions. SUPA is planning to focus on inter-datacenter traffic management as a use-case via VPNs and hence the specific extension will have to detail VPN properties, not QoS or access control or generic policy routing properties. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
- [Supa] SUPA questions Benoit Claise
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions JF Tremblay
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Benoit Claise
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Benoit Claise
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions John Strassner
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Natale, Bob
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions John Strassner
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Natale, Bob
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions John Strassner
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions John Strassner
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions John Strassner
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions John Strassner
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Natale, Bob
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions John Strassner
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Supa] SUPA questions John Strassner