Re: [Teas] WG adoption poll: draft-dong-teas-nrp-scalability-02

["Dongjie (Jimmy)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Shunsuke,

Thanks for your review and comments.

Please see some replies inline:

From: Teas [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Shunsuke Homma
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 2:53 PM
To: Lou Berger <[e-mail]>; TEAS WG <[e-mail]>; TEAS WG Chairs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Teas] WG adoption poll: draft-dong-teas-nrp-scalability-02

Hi WG,

I read the draft and it would be useful for considering to realize network slices. Thus, I support the adoption of the document.

Furthermore, I have some comments as below. I'll be happy if authors consider them in the future work.

- The current analysis of control plane approaches seems generic. For example, it may be more helpful if it is analyzed what types of information should be treated by a centralized (or distributed) approach from network slicing aspect.

[Jie] Good suggestion. This document did mention that a hybrid control mechanism based on both the centralized and distributed control plane is recommended, following that some further text about which type of information is better used by which part of the control plane could be added.

- Slicing over multi-administrative domains cases may be a consideration point.

[Jie] Agreed. This could be added later as long as we have better understanding about the multi-domain cases.

- Although it may not completely match with the scope of this document, I'm personally interested in comparison of IETF technologies for network separation in control plane text. For example, realization of IETF Network Slice with SR-TE LSP vs. with Flex-algo.

[Jie] I understand the separation in control plane is related to NRP and network slicing, although not completely in the scope of this document. But we can add some text about the comparison of different control plane mechanisms in a future update.

Best regards,
Jie

Best regards,

Shunsuke

On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 3:46 PM Luis M. Contreras <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi all,

I support the adoption of this draft. However I think the NRP concept requires a more detailed definition (probably in both framework and in this draft) since by now it is a very much abstract concept with no clear translation to tangible resources (i.e., is the NRP a topology, a portion of queues, some ports and links in a set of devices, altogether?). I would expect a better description of the NRP concept in future iterations.

Thanks

Luis


El jue, 16 jun 2022 a las 13:47, Lou Berger (<[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>) escribió:
Hello,

This email begins a 2-week adoption poll for:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-teas-nrp-scalability/

Please note that IPR has been disclosed on this document:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-dong-teas-nrp-scalability

Please voice your support or objections to adoption on the list by the
end of the day (any time zone) July 1.

Thank you,
Lou (as Co-chair)

_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas


--
___________________________________________
Luis M. Contreras
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Global CTIO unit / Telefonica
_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas