IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Teas] 答复: "Hierarchical T-SDN Controller"

Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com> Wed, 19 July 2017 15:11 UTC

Return-Path: <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
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 91A2A131DA7 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 08:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 1qb8vdSTRdU7 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 08:11:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B294131D6D for <teas@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 08:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DRO16046; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 15:11:05 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.33) by lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 16:11:04 +0100
Received: from DGGEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.36]) by DGGEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::74d9:c659:fbec:21fa%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 23:10:58 +0800
From: Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
To: "Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE/Stuttgart)" <michael.scharf@nokia.com>, Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: "Hierarchical T-SDN Controller"
Thread-Index: AdMAY31MhKwsTD/KSDOTWzU1Cn4gEgABBRRgAABvEYAADeTdkA==
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 15:10:58 +0000
Message-ID: <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF8AB569BCF@DGGEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <AM5PR0701MB25472B2B1574786C4C4FF12E93A60@AM5PR0701MB2547.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <AM2PR07MB099427639587A98BA6E36061F0A60@AM2PR07MB0994.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <AM5PR0701MB25474975CE920C7002DEB29B93A60@AM5PR0701MB2547.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM5PR0701MB25474975CE920C7002DEB29B93A60@AM5PR0701MB2547.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.47.74.26]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF8AB569BCFDGGEML501MBXchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020206.596F7689.0246, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.1.36, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 640ed4c85f2221ce3c88002229cd00c1
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/JybuSkScKvLQ-GOKx4cFKjr1EqU>
Subject: [Teas] 答复: "Hierarchical T-SDN Controller"
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: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 15:11:12 -0000

I agree with Michael.

BTW, I think it is also easy to understand by people in CCAMP, TEAS and PCE WGs, which are inside of the IETF, :)



Thanks

Fatai

发件人: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE/Stuttgart)
发送时间: 2017年7月19日 16:41
收件人: Daniele Ceccarelli; TEAS WG
主题: Re: [Teas] "Hierarchical T-SDN Controller"

Well, the IETF has an area called “TSV” and so in the IETF “transport” has yet another meaning ;-)

Given that, such terminology would have to be defined in IETF documents anyway. A definition of these terms could clarify the meaning for MPLS-TE and SR-TE.

Anyway, my key point is that I think the terminology used by draft-bryskin-te-topo-and-tunnel-modeling-00 is easy to understand by people outside the IETF.

Michael



From: Daniele Ceccarelli [mailto:daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 10:28 AM
To: Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE/Stuttgart) <michael.scharf@nokia.com<mailto:michael.scharf@nokia.com>>; TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org<mailto:teas@ietf.org>>
Subject: RE: "Hierarchical T-SDN Controller"

+1 , BUT…

We need to be careful with the word “transport”. In some contexts it refers to pure transport technologies (e.g. OTN, WDM) and does not include other upper layer TE technologies (e.g. MPLS-TE and SR-TE), in other contexts it includes also the latter.
I’m more than happy to use the term transport SDN controller provided we’re all on the same page (which should be the second).

BR
Daniele



From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE/Stuttgart)
Sent: mercoledì 19 luglio 2017 10:01
To: TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org<mailto:teas@ietf.org>>
Subject: [Teas] "Hierarchical T-SDN Controller"

In the (useful) I-D draft-bryskin-te-topo-and-tunnel-modeling-00, Section 1.9. “Multi-Domain Transport Service Coordination” uses the following wording:

   A client of multiple TE network domains may need to
   orchestrate/coordinate its transport service setup/manipulation
   across some or all the domains. One example of such a client is a
   Hierarchical T-SDN Controller, HC, managing a connected multi-domain
   transport network where each of the domains is controlled by a
   separate Domain T-SDN Controller, DC.

Outside the IETF, I have the impression that this terminology is quite common when discussing TEAS YANG models. I wonder whether we could use this terminology more frequently inside in TEAS.

Michael

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email