Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing
Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Tue, 16 May 2017 13:38 UTC
Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BF0E129BE8 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 May 2017 06:38:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 TuzPLn9Q0q1x for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 May 2017 06:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy9.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy9-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.20.122]) (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 4A5F7129B39 for <teas@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 May 2017 06:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CMOut01 (unknown [10.0.90.82]) by gproxy9.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB1E01E079F for <teas@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 May 2017 07:34:53 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by CMOut01 with id M1aq1v00G2SSUrH011atn5; Tue, 16 May 2017 07:34:53 -0600
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=K+5SJ2eI c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=tJ8p9aeEuA8A:10 a=i0EeH86SAAAA:8 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=AEDFM0qtAAAA:8 a=gpJgY_SdGf4xdYu3BCIA:9 a=FGEGLg4zO5e89Qer:21 a=RiS__4qesGjJ7zOk:21 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22 a=NCq4FBG6EvGFEERSFaZp:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=uHXqsSKXTsPLDMVjSO46HwcSfdzG5qeIzYkyM6ZJho0=; b=wtXFlj4A7yzue6Cv3mWkU5VMzs 5DUJ93ou2O/A+dVPukMD0qPiy/yaxzUQT8brnIXpYybkNcpU6/MYuQ3d+qhx3KNnq6G1UfTACYqkb xEUpghoTwIm3g9zi5ZEe5g8pL;
Received: from pool-100-15-84-20.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.84.20]:37332 helo=[11.4.0.6]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1dAcck-0002t5-0t; Tue, 16 May 2017 07:34:50 -0600
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
To: Igor Bryskin <igor.bryskin@huawei.com>, "Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT/Vimercate)" <sergio.belotti@nokia.com>, Gert Grammel <ggrammel@juniper.net>, Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>, teas@ietf.org, adrian@olddog.co.uk
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 09:34:48 -0400
Message-ID: <15c1177e0c0.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <0C72C38E7EBC34499E8A9E7DD00786390993DBF8@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
References: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E172B2CA60E@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com> <97EE7243-CB44-40AD-B02D-98E07D9C79F2@juniper.net> <DB3PR07MB0588EA2B00C389E762D8C59F91E60@DB3PR07MB0588.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <0C72C38E7EBC34499E8A9E7DD00786390993DBF8@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
User-Agent: AquaMail/1.9.1-360 (build: 100900101)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.84.20
X-Exim-ID: 1dAcck-0002t5-0t
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-84-20.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([11.4.0.6]) [100.15.84.20]:37332
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 5
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/B2UQYpQxbthFSYrQe3wXJ5qfH_A>
Subject: Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 13:38:16 -0000
Perhaps it's time to bring the discussion to the slicing list and report back their reaponse.... Lou On May 16, 2017 8:31:19 AM Igor Bryskin <Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Sergio, > > I would also like to hear more from network slicing experts. > > My understanding is that the difference in the separation (in terms of > control and data planes, security, etc.). For example, traditional BGP > based L3 VPNs (that use provider's common control plane for their > management and IP/MPLS TE tunnels to inter-connect their PEs) will probably > not be able guarantee for the clients msec range connectivity setup times > required by 5g, while provided by the same provider fully > separated/genuinely private IP/MPLS networks (that do not share IP/MPLS > control plane and infrastructure, whose network topology is supported by > separate L0/L1 connections) hopefully will be able to provide such > guarantees. Therefore, I define layer network slices as dynamically managed > fully isolated in control and data planes private TE layer networks, which > may share one or more underlying server layer networks. > > > Cheers, > Igor > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Belotti, Sergio > (Nokia - IT/Vimercate) > Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 6:08 AM > To: Gert Grammel; Leeyoung; teas@ietf.org; adrian@olddog.co.uk > Subject: Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing > > Hi Gert, > > "Thinking a bit about it I came to the point where "VPN" and "network > slices" seem to describe the same entity or at least a "network slice" > being a VPN of VPNs?" > > I share completely your conclusion , I'd like if someone can explain if a > difference really exists . > > Thanks > Sergio > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gert Grammel > Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 7:02 PM > To: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>; teas@ietf.org; adrian@olddog.co.uk > Subject: Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing > > Leeyoung, > > Thank you for taking a stab on this. Usually when getting to a definition, > I try to establish what kind of existing constructs would fall under the > definition. If my understanding is correct, the following list of > constructs would all satisfy the definition somehow. > - A TDM network with a p2p TDM connection > - A PSC capable network carrying a p2p circuit (such as EPL/EVPL) > - An MPLS LSP using a traffic engineered IP network > - A L2VPN using a traffic engineered MPLS network > - A L3VPN using a traffic engineered IP network > - A TCP connection using a traffic engineered IP network > - Different QoS classes in an IP network > > Thinking a bit about it I came to the point where "VPN" and "network > slices" seem to describe the same entity or at least a "network slice" > being a VPN of VPNs? > > Gert > > > On 2017-05-17, 16:44, "Teas on behalf of Leeyoung" <teas-bounces@ietf.org > on behalf of leeyoung@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi Adrian and others, > > We'd like cross check with you on some terminology we introduced newly. Any > comment on these terms will be greatly appreciated. > > We introduced 'network slicing' as follows: > > Network slicing is a collection of resources > that are used to establish logically dedicated virtual networks > over TE networks. It allows a network provider to provide > dedicated virtual networks for application/customer over a > common network infrastructure. The logically dedicated > resources are a part of the larger common network > infrastructures that are shared among various network slice > instances which are the end-to-end realization of network > slicing, consisting of the combination of physically or > logically dedicated resources. > > > Thanks. > Young and Daniele > -----Original Message----- > From: Leeyoung > Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 1:41 PM > To: teas@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Teas] I-D Action: draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-05.txt > > Hi, > > This update is intended to incorporate the comments from the last WG > meeting and any pending issues. We also have taken the global editorial > changes to make it consistent through the document. Major changes are: > > - Inclusion of "network slicing" definition from ACTN perspective (in the > terminology section) > - Added virtual network service (VNS) section (Section 3) to define types > of VNS. > - Incorporated "orchestration" (service/network) mapping to ACTN > architecture (See Section 5.2) > - Created a new section 6 (Topology Abstraction Method) where we imported > some texts from ACTN abstraction method > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-teas-actn-abstraction-01 > - Added Appendices A & B to discuss example deployment scenarios such as > example of MDSC and PNC functions integrated in Service/Network > Orchestrator (Appendix A) and example of IP + Optical network with L3VPN > service (Appendix B) > > In regard to ACTN abstraction method draft, we are going to keep it as a > separate draft and use this document to elaborate other aspects not > imported to the framework document. > > The following diff pointer will help you see the changes with this revision: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-05 > > The co-authors believe that the document is ready for WG LC. Any > changes/comments will be appreciated. > > Thanks & Best regards, > Young & Daniele (on behalf of other co-authors/contributors) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 10:41 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: teas@ietf.org > Subject: [Teas] I-D Action: draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-05.txt > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Traffic Engineering Architecture and > Signaling of the IETF. > > Title : Framework for Abstraction and Control of Traffic > Engineered Networks > Authors : Daniele Ceccarelli > Young Lee > Filename : draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-05.txt > Pages : 41 > Date : 2017-05-05 > > Abstract: > Traffic Engineered networks have a variety of mechanisms to > facilitate the separation of the data plane and control plane. They > also have a range of management and provisioning protocols to > configure and activate network resources. These mechanisms > represent key technologies for enabling flexible and dynamic > networking. > > Abstraction of network resources is a technique that can be applied > to a single network domain or across multiple domains to create a > single virtualized network that is under the control of a network > operator or the customer of the operator that actually owns > the network resources. > > This document provides a framework for Abstraction and Control of > Traffic Engineered Networks (ACTN). > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-05 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-05 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-05 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > Teas mailing list > Teas@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas > > _______________________________________________ > Teas mailing list > Teas@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas > > > _______________________________________________ > Teas mailing list > Teas@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas > > _______________________________________________ > Teas mailing list > Teas@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas > > _______________________________________________ > Teas mailing list > Teas@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas >
- [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Ricard Vilalta
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Gert Grammel
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT/Vimercate)
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Lou Berger
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Kiran.Makhijani
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Leeyoung
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Jeff Tantsura
- [Teas] 答复: terminology discussion network slicing qiangli (D)
- [Teas] 答复: terminology discussion network slicing qiangli (D)
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] 答复: terminology discussion network sli… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Daniele Ceccarelli
- [Teas] 答复: terminology discussion network slicing qiangli (D)
- [Teas] 答复: terminology discussion network slicing qiangli (D)
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Igor Bryskin
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… sebastian
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… sebastian
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] terminology discussion network slicing Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Gert Grammel
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… sebastian
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Flinck, Hannu (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… Gert Grammel
- Re: [Teas] [Netslices] terminology discussion net… sebastian