Re: [Teas] WG adoption - draft-nsdt-teas-ietf-network-slice-definition

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Mon, 18 January 2021 20:26 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 5721C3A0809; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 12:26:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.362
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.362 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.262, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 NCDin0SAx9vZ; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 12:26:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (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 9AF7D3A046B; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 12:26:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DKNc22l5jz6GJgX; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 12:26:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1611001602; bh=50kiRJLiXzOIG8mQNe4v8lBMLl0ACpHBYNBMzd52wd0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=E/kXK4DELmrp9YAcHHPWsPGGXlPhHgETXKpCpGDnF1aFrKdViJeF5DA1+79zO07kr 64HYugRL19dQlpMF9YeuhNgz0M2zhmkrp1gMPSDIhDpoCU5krUDgq7Xu+M9sBpbdlI 69mjWOcEQD1rpsLmJg/3LgjwZWhphJN+60Zha2Vc=
X-Quarantine-ID: <3wyedawTGRMn>
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.128.43] (unknown [50.225.209.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DKNc14zt2z6G8Cr; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 12:26:41 -0800 (PST)
To: Uma Chunduri <umac.ietf@gmail.com>, Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
Cc: TEAS WG Chairs <teas-chairs@ietf.org>, TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
References: <CA+YzgTuJWXENUQLHrFeYWga1XumA4cf1Gr7DgqXw74fxvz-FNQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAF18ct4=PeKYHC9qXuhDg3MpHmeu5hx-AdCOZuGU9-WdGuZKVg@mail.gmail.com> <CAF18ct7bg=2c_9Md-c58=J=v+EhjG+J7=L3_gCQGrx2i6xy+9w@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <35371313-c361-e8b0-76f6-ce0a09b2ac23@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 15:26:40 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAF18ct7bg=2c_9Md-c58=J=v+EhjG+J7=L3_gCQGrx2i6xy+9w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/gnWQWhzoPSB1r6w-Rgib3IiLa3A>
Subject: Re: [Teas] WG adoption - draft-nsdt-teas-ietf-network-slice-definition
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: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 20:26:44 -0000

I have observed multiple conversations where the absence of a qualifier 
on "slice" or "network slice" leaves folk participating with different 
understandings.

I don't care if the modifier is "IETF" as agreed.  or if we agree on 
another term.  folks objected to using "Transport" as the qualifier, for 
understandable reasons.

Yours,
Joel

On 1/18/2021 3:15 PM, Uma Chunduri wrote:
> I meant:
> 
>  >I personally feel we (as IETF) can distinguish this important work and 
> applicability of this work *without* being explicitly prepending 'IETF'.
> 
> --
> Uma C.
> 
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:58 AM Uma Chunduri <umac.ietf@gmail.com 
> <mailto:umac.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Dear All,
> 
>     The definitions and scope defined in this draft can be applicable to
>     many networks in a generic fashion, where IETF technologies are
>     used  in various network segments. I see tremendous work done by the
>     Design Team with folks who participated in multi-domain slicing BoFs
>     prior to that  to get to this point.
> 
>     However, though the name "IETF Network slice" certainly
>     distinguishes the slicing work being done in many global
>     organizations (viz., ITU-T GSTR TN5G, ONF SDN, 3GPP 5G, ETSI ISGs
>     NGP & NFV, GSMA, MEF LSO to name a few) , it creates bit complexity 
>     when this is being applied and being referred in E2E scenarios
>     specific to a domain. I can give examples a bit later.
> 
>     I also still see a lot of other documents in this group still refer
>     to Transport Network/Transport Network Slice. I presume the name
>     will be changed across all these documents in future.
>     I personally feel we (as IETF) can distinguish this important work
>     and applicability of this work being explicitly prepending 'IETF'. I
>     shall respond to the other thread here with my suggestion.
> 
>     Last but not least, I support this work and help further to make
>     this better.
> 
>     Cheers!
>     --
>     Uma C.
> 
> 
>     On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 6:02 AM Vishnu Pavan Beeram
>     <vishnupavan@gmail.com <mailto:vishnupavan@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>         All,
> 
>         This is start of a two week poll on making
>         draft-nsdt-teas-ietf-network-slice-definition-02 a TEAS working
>         group document.
>         Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or "no/do not
>         support". If indicating no, please state your reservations with the
>         document. If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd
>         like to see addressed once the document is a WG document.
> 
>         The poll ends January 18th.
> 
>         Thanks,
>         Pavan and Lou
>         _______________________________________________
>         Teas mailing list
>         Teas@ietf.org <mailto:Teas@ietf.org>
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>         <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> Teas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>