Re: [Teas-ns-dt] Slides for the WG meeting

Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 18 November 2019 05:58 UTC

Return-Path: <jefftant.ietf@gmail.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 51BB412088C for <teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 21:58:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 Fx8fxJGidqss for <teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 21:58:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62c.google.com (mail-pl1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 695CB12086C for <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 21:58:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id d29so9127875plj.8 for <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 21:58:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version; bh=/RTwVa2irh6gkbRTiVQ3sTkB/q965RaQvh8nfiv/yQU=; b=exbp86sip0iQJ+rDSb0O2bCbCsPQS1LsyhTtTDBBrdmzJ2UeItJgRs6nX7QafN3ipw CwwYmW6HvoiB3KWLMFh38WeUUidxjbLCkJkdoADFIqglGfVg8DHEg5JBOzB1gCCSy7KE F4zeal/S2FzJundZJX7sY7AXRH7EtxeVH36VpMMETBfd6UCSv8NZe+Lr9PXT4DwDWMYo IHTuDfVLlpRWpWA1zhMT+8xeZzXeUTSJoA6JhRYT5QggBXt4uMHoovoKxLW+6+tgt3d5 Vt7pmdSVx9VhQp0ZOX8hBOE3xsS/F3xeJMghscYSUZoFFsQQ90IBc/OaqMjpEZu57oBl Fcyg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references :subject:mime-version; bh=/RTwVa2irh6gkbRTiVQ3sTkB/q965RaQvh8nfiv/yQU=; b=O5MIQIn9ql7eJ+xuQUnRRsTmoIkSy1hQSl86gdge7bxXwm60gpZdSQoKf/z9ALFtu1 GrLNT1ke0YNG4GXa97gOVH58o+fslSDPragR46Tu+maSJzmK3tnSIrxYdk8BdCVZAkAg rYNIhERl5oG4A8BHIas7ptrDzjl86yHcgEgAfsvEERKDWtqN9QJGKxdFSfZE7Kn3pEx0 JzW3XNEQVS3G+ZNqAusSriXtDEJ0xImokjAlXjlFRGwkC+rGXcTrQG6eCZr6R6BCDynz Ck78Hd1YoVgfST9z82p18Omqu1ewWGh52vJb7KlDwu+NiX1ZaCarxjdjSQTAGRHjaUzj hsig==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVe6RzDomrBBwY0oS8yxA8UWCRrRqnf8RfwRk/ulrsWXeKerm8K 7G4NxrBIXxd0o57ZTpXLP9I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyTdeecUYR4jo3B73+w3YiyxS6sI2IYrGxPT6MT+BsmUUNTtqAlno6cicIY2JAmsaq0QmnFsQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9a03:: with SMTP id v3mr27757681plp.61.1574056731929; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 21:58:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [31.133.151.247] (dhcp-97f7.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.151.247]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f26sm16925527pgf.22.2019.11.17.21.58.50 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 17 Nov 2019 21:58:51 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:58:41 +0800
From: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@ericsson.com>, "teas-ns-dt@ietf.org" <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>, "Rokui, Reza (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)" <reza.rokui@nokia.com>
Message-ID: <68fdb74b-4055-4547-a7ab-44098da027e6@Spark>
In-Reply-To: <48856444-49B5-4D78-BBC3-8AC87613000C@nokia.com>
References: <0BEE3510-3DCF-451E-AFC0-12053C8BF62E@nokia.com> <49B8E426-4EFE-47BB-A5B7-5CE826430344@ericsson.com> <48856444-49B5-4D78-BBC3-8AC87613000C@nokia.com>
X-Readdle-Message-ID: 68fdb74b-4055-4547-a7ab-44098da027e6@Spark
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5dd23318_5ec6afd4_99e9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas-ns-dt/KO9f7r_q5Tgh9IsjvwN2xOkq8PY>
Subject: Re: [Teas-ns-dt] Slides for the WG meeting
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, 18 Nov 2019 05:58:55 -0000

I’m inclined towards “Transport Slice” as well, I’d however like us not to use tunnels/similar wording (it has a very particular connotation in routing world).
I think we have also agreed not to use “NF” term.


Cheers,
Jeff
On Nov 18, 2019, 10:31 AM +0800, Rokui, Reza (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) <reza.rokui@nokia.com>, wrote:
> Jari,
>
> As per our discussion yesterday at IETF, we will discuss the terminology today at IETF.
> I agree with your comment on Transport slice subnet. Instead, my suggestion is the term “Transport Slice”.
>
> Reza
>
>
> From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@ericsson.com>
> Date: Sunday, November 17, 2019 at 2:31 PM
> To: Reza Rokui <reza.rokui@nokia.com>, "teas-ns-dt@ietf.org" <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Teas-ns-dt] Slides for the WG meeting
>
> > Slide 5 and 6 “Design Team Scope & Plan”: A good summary of the scope
>
> Thanks!
>
> > As discussed before between us, let’s agreed on terminology and use it consistently. On slide 4 shown below, I am suggesting to use the following terminologies:
>
>     • Instead of “Transport Network Connections: à “Transport Slice Subnet” (do not use of Transpot Network slice or Transport Slice). This is consistent by other SDOs
>     • “Transport Slice Subnet” is a set of connections
>     • Please add C3 to the picture and mark it as “Other Slice Subnets” (Any suggestion for a better name?)
>     • C1 and C2 are “Transport Slice Subnets
>     • S1 is a Network Slice (which might contain multiple Transport sub-slices and Other Sub-Slices
>
>
> Mmm. It could be just me, but I’m not sure we are yet in full agreement on everything in the terminology. Maybe worth discussing in the meeting.  But does “slice subnet” imply some sort of addressing? Is that true of all cases, what about, say, Ethernet networks or even pseudowires, or other things that provide a mere bit pipe? And what about that “set of connections”, how would that work in the case a p2mp connection for instance?
>
> Jari
>
> --
> Teas-ns-dt mailing list
> Teas-ns-dt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas-ns-dt