Re: [Teas-ns-dt] Suggested new text for the isolation part and related characteristics
Kiran Makhijani <kiranm@futurewei.com> Mon, 09 March 2020 20:17 UTC
Return-Path: <kiranm@futurewei.com>
X-Original-To: teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C2AA3A1676
for <teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:17:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
header.d=futurewei.com
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 T-88gauqRGsJ for <teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:17:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
(mail-dm6nam11on2137.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.223.137])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7309C3A164D
for <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:17:35 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none;
b=NWXs1ZchMmTYxkf4Ju4ZR3Ab6RHx6NQfFM6vdDXlxF2QtfkV1QfReYBatdwMFeF/tOrJAG/C9VdN1HCxwq++AqNELkMJHAHl85Iz2hlPNUCtiVrAPktlzNRoqy/qOZqlcMNIoiG7OOs/MZJTbqxVAQKxPQp6wJu3xfUL52z6G5WReo7Qhi0+N/BIWIs973mv2aMzjtEvZNzVymvpwx9LQHHr3rMzGst6DSPkRPbnsGJscUpysF6QRKjbJuDxlY5Vb3eU//Sh7+WHpiIZULAiH3+tcl2EA4SL58ggoXEyEvPwMcO/6fuFqQb0klmucmf60fsxkFH3miIBoeqLi7Kcug==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com;
s=arcselector9901;
h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck;
bh=oWnOftj7jo1bZmFwIgMjDghec6BvcGt2di9mhZtSM4g=;
b=U6FWXCHg7ByOhW78VFnB/pRR40o9pcw1QxyIPrrQE72sLamurd2qfYCXjwGkHh56H4H2W16ePRiFJ7GdfLqj5eHu8cXgYFYVAT0Hsl0i0u+pRoxAwl3iYvrJhP1rEjD7385Av46wk7bT6dE+GU+YuxidD6VkHQCAYv8cxAFGmcrCNx+UrBMuMiU5f6vFLjFIpRGrPecKZWLDLOxzOc7KrCaUVhanK43/m6ZV+taK+s5kMJyEUF+1FIAPScuKLSTY60tgyt1aSVNA3Wi3nDiEOxalu8Mm9BmHQHgVVLExth97Nseb5S7ZhhXmlL0t9J5IXt7SCGcVXOT+uJRk96toPw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass
smtp.mailfrom=futurewei.com; dmarc=pass action=none
header.from=futurewei.com; dkim=pass header.d=futurewei.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Futurewei.com;
s=selector2;
h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck;
bh=oWnOftj7jo1bZmFwIgMjDghec6BvcGt2di9mhZtSM4g=;
b=DMOeeC+3e6D3++OcbQ+NQg6aYPSH98US8ylpUvoSdYqFShyhy5AAz34lm4K2DwYc67yYLsUtL4lk+iEoXQgGd8FLOjUgSSl5O6IwXPZv7/yBwieqzK2fF6Hqc3UZst3TW648u1Lc5+8uSXMQZfthlIlfirm4VAXZzgwbjM4TJIU=
Received: from BYAPR13MB2437.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a02:cb::23)
by BYAPR13MB2502.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a02:ca::30)
with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2814.10; Mon, 9 Mar
2020 20:17:33 +0000
Received: from BYAPR13MB2437.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
([fe80::d01b:c684:d858:fd26]) by BYAPR13MB2437.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
([fe80::d01b:c684:d858:fd26%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2814.007; Mon, 9 Mar 2020
20:17:33 +0000
From: Kiran Makhijani <kiranm@futurewei.com>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@ericsson.com>
CC: "teas-ns-dt@ietf.org" <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Suggested new text for the isolation part and related
characteristics
Thread-Index: AQHV9hiLicyGIIVGJkuxqgyA5gMUJKhAPf0A
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 20:17:33 +0000
Message-ID: <8B183E6E-78F0-4FAD-9D0B-19F3AF60BB04@futurewei.com>
References: <5FDBE56C-E65B-4EB9-A5C8-0E382A49B479@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <5FDBE56C-E65B-4EB9-A5C8-0E382A49B479@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.22.0.200209
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is )
smtp.mailfrom=kiranm@futurewei.com;
x-originating-ip: [73.63.186.221]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4c2ce47d-2936-4279-e8fe-08d7c466e6c4
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR13MB2502:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR13MB250284F14FE2B0330DD187B2D9FE0@BYAPR13MB2502.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 0337AFFE9A
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;
SFS:(10019020)(4636009)(346002)(396003)(136003)(366004)(376002)(39850400004)(189003)(199004)(66946007)(8676002)(8936002)(81166006)(81156014)(64756008)(66446008)(66556008)(2906002)(66476007)(5660300002)(2616005)(36756003)(478600001)(6486002)(4326008)(76116006)(6512007)(6916009)(316002)(71200400001)(6506007)(33656002)(86362001)(53546011)(26005)(186003);
DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR13MB2502;
H:BYAPR13MB2437.namprd13.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en;
PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: futurewei.com does not designate
permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 0PMUSQUPgh2Y8BEvtyL7aMdDtQss5H1lsSeqVVbUTNEp9DxEPqELTarPhr6/rR5y7NXYLZi7fdoOHAqjEcf8a1rih5Dc4E58dhmDnATjRQTmSUMvVDeNsXVZRJV9pAj5rRNUM3MWGdUFRkCJLXNQOSqf8kQwnoUwOYCnaFMHOqjmPXOGQqQNZ2nvDFlKoOx6I+36YndQQ0e6YUi4WaU4F+ueEou/sQpYTfJr5H//IotZJ1FxL7yQ2QBcnNeO52c9Ro45kv0QJ4vVzbnt5SJ3NPiU81h5uY9Bqzjau8GWIOj/WOTJxX6255X2W6SQkDE5P70923t4qsnfGTea4H2nTPGIFUHkbvlaxI63HpBrqVlJHazQsGAd72uPiG5MGga7SMRxL8oLxMp7pPBynvFJrwFsIG6J8cKRDxD432O+fsM6QmRi8MYpJYXr99S4AjWf
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: MKVLQP7U8sa9SwKOXp27vBDc3wX4rMZiswAVdSsSyqPwyuliIC7uygzPAOMfogMQdQEvJCbSrLFxu2LPj2mZUoWT0BJekjw76GtAzILDb2/7l7tawSuZaXXqdQdgj7hgWMCwuUz9qKtfUvOLssfDmQ==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_8B183E6E78F04FAD9D0B19F3AF60BB04futureweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: Futurewei.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4c2ce47d-2936-4279-e8fe-08d7c466e6c4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Mar 2020 20:17:33.2507 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 0fee8ff2-a3b2-4018-9c75-3a1d5591fedc
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: e7ka7LoySWE0sH0JOuV9eMYJc3n9beIZ4zmtEt/2zaTRSUOkVHh+8sGCrwAXLCiC55TIrs5kEhfC3t7h2Bdj3w==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR13MB2502
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas-ns-dt/5s_2rE6uvSHLYdsA-PXT0SzbNZs>
Subject: Re: [Teas-ns-dt] Suggested new text for the isolation part and
related characteristics
X-BeenThere: teas-ns-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TEAS Network Slicing Design Team <teas-ns-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas-ns-dt>,
<mailto:teas-ns-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas-ns-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-ns-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas-ns-dt>,
<mailto:teas-ns-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2020 20:17:39 -0000
I have incorporated the suggestions along with a few editorial changes. It also has newer text for my own clarity – the discussions we had on two kinds of isolation. It makes this section a bit lengthy – but improvements at a later time will be made. Thanks Kiran From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@ericsson.com> Date: Monday, March 9, 2020 at 6:42 AM To: Kiran Makhijani <kiranm@futurewei.com> Cc: "teas-ns-dt@ietf.org" <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org> Subject: Suggested new text for the isolation part and related characteristics I’d like to suggest the following text as a change c to current definitions document discussion on isolation. This text casts isolation as a characteristic that can be requested, along with resource redundancy and other characteristics. It is a requirement level issue rather than a specific way to implement isolation. 4.1. Service Level Objectives on Transport Slice A transport slice is defined ... A non-exhaustive list of characteristics types for transport slice is described below: o Guaranteed Bandwidth: assurance of minimum or range of the bandwidth requirement. Requested unidirectionally. o ... o Packet loss rate: To specify permissible packet loss rate between two endpoints. For critical networks, this number may be very close to zero. See [RFC7680]. Bandwidth guarantees come in two variants: o The above characteristics can be specified as hard limits and not affected by other traffic or as soft. In a soft limit, a violation of the limit may occur in rare cases due to resource interference. In such cases, the limit will be maintained by the controller within a certain tolerance level of that objective. Note that specifying a hard limit will not prevent failures -- such as losing a node -- from affecting the transport slice. Protection against such issues is possible, but needs to be specified separately (see item "resource redundancy" below). Note also that the hard and soft limits do not say anything about the specific implementation of how these limits are achieve. Different implementations might use different techniques, from avoiding oversubsription to dedicating particular links or their virtual fractions to particular transport slices. o ... o etc. The framework may further specify ... 4.1.1. Isolation Providing a hard limit for the characteristics of a transport slice means that the behavior and performance of other transport slices should not impact that slice, even if they run over the same underlying infrastructure or use logically shared network resources. Since the transport slices are logically partitioned over the shared resources, a certain degree of isolation is expected even when no hard limit has been specified. When the shared resource pools begin to become saturated, SLO violations can happen, however, impacting the performance or operation of service associated with the transport slice. The degree of isolation can be derived from availability characteristics requested, such as whether a hard or soft limit was requested. Requesting a hard limit may commit more resources than would be required for a softer limit. When realizing a transport slice, the network controller should be responsible for allocating and providing resources according to the specified characteristics. SLO violations can occur for two reasons and corresponding statements apply o Shared resource interference: i.e. multiple transport slices simultaneously share the same resource, and one of them consume the resource in surplus. If the SLO guarantees are strictly required, then the network controller can be informed about the requirement using hard limit. Note that the terms hard and soft limit are requirement oriented and different from what is specified in, for instance, [I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn]). o Resource failure or fault occurs, such as a link or node failure. Where it is important to defend against these, the relevant characteristics on resoure redundancy (and perhaps some other characteristics on restoration speed and other factors) need to be specified.
- [Teas-ns-dt] Suggested new text for the isolation… Jari Arkko
- Re: [Teas-ns-dt] Suggested new text for the isola… Jari Arkko
- Re: [Teas-ns-dt] Suggested new text for the isola… Kiran Makhijani
- Re: [Teas-ns-dt] Suggested new text for the isola… Jari Arkko