Re: [Teas] Moving forward with draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sun, 23 May 2021 17:50 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 BDD2F3A208D for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 May 2021 10:50:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.052
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.052 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MAY_BE_FORGED=0.846, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no 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 xMlny3OLM1kh for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 May 2021 10:50:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta7.iomartmail.com (mta7.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.157]) (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 7A7163A208C for <teas@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 May 2021 10:50:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (vs4.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.122]) by mta7.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 14NHoDZO024345; Sun, 23 May 2021 18:50:13 +0100
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB494608C; Sun, 23 May 2021 18:50:13 +0100 (BST)
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60EAD4608B; Sun, 23 May 2021 18:50:13 +0100 (BST)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.249]) by vs4.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Sun, 23 May 2021 18:50:13 +0100 (BST)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (65.151.51.84.dyn.plus.net [84.51.151.65] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 14NHoC0a018600 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 23 May 2021 18:50:13 +0100
Reply-To: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: <peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn>
Cc: <teas@ietf.org>
References: 037401d740c5$70a9cc30$51fd6490$@olddog.co.uk <202105061009251808548@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <202105061009251808548@zte.com.cn>
Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 18:50:12 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <006f01d74ffc$14e8c130$3eba4390$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQIsZfkOrxL1j2VMpG1gYo070ztYnapHKDvw
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 84.51.151.65
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2034-8.6.0.1017-26176.002
X-TM-AS-Result: No--1.896-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--1.896-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2034-8.6.1017-26176.002
X-TMASE-Result: 10--1.896500-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: QfHZjzml1E+yoI+bK8UPQnFPUrVDm6jtC/ExpXrHizzPlmI4N1s8ilVx c/d4wt8XRPcyFtl62OszZRFJRee/WuCtSyDyy0NjUNaPigviKR9k3BJZhPPjjOcAOC0cQIqv2Uw BLM8az1T55VbxwR5f82Mbwhlr0L2i6NmVjMtuA18APmNKDWsW0ARsBMbTTgAPfWQ10sxxRTcQyM OxzPzlhWLyNtMjI4kVle/IpkQAHrTPwKb4UhVyo4MilwFDj2JE5RMDFPANjShRD5heJnxuK6s7H 9ycK/bok/VOct39O1fEwwc9fF2NzgtuKBGekqUpm+MB6kaZ2g69n88eDwLolArwMnYQ/nfmAkKP NFcI0xHBEsy5Bnb1M7nd83n/7SyRybjWEX5rJCM70W07uC+cNZNt3oOsImVqiSNSb8sBMEnkP2y apUEP3KKWedUMQI938fsC+xPFkxvsNp90fT4EjuoLJh5uXtfs
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/MLmLNWBcruZExapzYJtqkkVC5Sk>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Moving forward with draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 23 May 2021 17:50:17 -0000

Hi Shaofu,

> Thanks for your hard work for the slice architecture.
>
> I have a little comments,  as we know, there are slice scenarios that have
> nothing to do with VPN, for example, multiple slices in backbone can be
> used for connections between metros. So it is strange to put a usecase
> (VPN+) of slice be as a scheme for slice architecture, as section 6.3 described.

I think there are several things to say on this subject.

The first is that you're right that the use cases for network slicing go far beyond providing VPNs. But I would note that "connectivity services" are very similar to VPNs: they are expressed in terms of a connectivity matrix between a number of endpoints. Actually, you'll notice that this is comparable to a network slice.

I think the next thing to notice is that section 6.3 is not a use case. The whole of section 6 is about ways to realise (i.e., build) network slices, not a discussion of how to use slices.

In fact, ACTN and VPN+ are both TEAS working group architectural solutions (although VPN+ isn't an RFC as yet). That's why they're included in this section.

Best,
Adrian