Re: [Teas] A question on the definitions of SDP and SAP

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 21 March 2022 12:38 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 D167B3A1A9D; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 05:38:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 k2j6_D1LjsCU; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 05:38:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta6.iomartmail.com (mta6.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.156]) (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 464393A1A17; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 05:38:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (vs1.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.121]) by mta6.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 22LCbvKK026692; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:37:57 GMT
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E029B4604B; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:37:56 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA5E44603D; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:37:56 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.248]) by vs1.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:37:56 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([85.255.237.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 22LCbrGa004472 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:37:55 GMT
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com, 'Greg Mirsky' <gregimirsky@gmail.com>, 'TEAS WG' <teas@ietf.org>, 'opsawg' <opsawg@ietf.org>
References: <CA+RyBmXKneDhX7yELTrhEEL19iL9rATtW_ZSvgceEh6ygP3uYQ@mail.gmail.com> <10787_1647863403_6238666B_10787_254_8_102a93ddc2d248dda598226a48932b5b@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <10787_1647863403_6238666B_10787_254_8_102a93ddc2d248dda598226a48932b5b@orange.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:37:53 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <041201d83d20$7d8f9800$78aec800$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0413_01D83D20.7D905B50"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: en-gb
Thread-Index: AQKNvFqu5zHlIyUWZF+EfMKH8dNougLQCEkxq0hHdIA=
X-Originating-IP: 85.255.237.131
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-8.6.0.1018-26784.007
X-TM-AS-Result: No--44.192-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--44.192-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-8.6.1018-26784.007
X-TMASE-Result: 10--44.191800-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: OoEa6u7Uk5/uYusHgJkgymjJpufOqOIA9mqZiOfja8/7fpPvTbQDBA+5 gZatHsyP+QETkYCeoFWV3COC/jT85C+6f/7y7+Gzm/t43d5OEX4wA0zrW4Apb1UusegvV0lI4YF T4GbuG+5YKJTez2dVw8Mj4/rpvityYy6AtAy7YZf4qCLIu0mtIJYaGUdeitddVXFz93jC3xftKL puM1pn1OyWuH2GEMRbzV5vC0iR7Xjece0aRiX9Wvi4nVERfgwdrWI1vVxmdLwzbxAFDC5gYs9VS EhrgETcUPJj0Fa/lbSoIZ4KuWfZLUqaeysh3CwVaJJSKnmxjl/NOGo+EZaP/O/coek3Pw/awxPq PaVY07W804ZpjkNmVFQs0CrIYHNmEEM/k7bj8LNDH3EJmWJbZg581pZFuoc90k0dQ92p8lFx/Fa QAiA77VrhQORE/g/Mqdikz2pNcI+JkR8/HXfgcQGo1vhC/pWjF37G3EfwWzFRZXIMsM/a+eD5CI cLwXN6eUr08OYAS+z7kwfJiRfByhO7C3UVWhpn31asM/gsp2mdKA+S8N206BKkpg8dQmdKkIlKo LwVBVA8DWpBm1CjZTmNLhXT11DOUgKYbZFF6GhOv40gqSZvz7f7gS4j/myPOCjykMcvhP4LwTxk KC1upZLUCjvVPrk1pd9eRR8QtJXDwzxYvNXdQK7tzl8n4dIAWAuSz3ewb221k/JQVjn50BiZsVh auLEn2QQJvp4Wi4Bq9oJbnOqI2ovptQwz5tsifYraJ2bpuF5ZS2boAkiQINQaG3OrempFRRa406 V/Ywxv5Wdp6ALt0Pz/jVa2JSBDBxsweNg3EaF9LQinZ4QefK9dKZJ2Vxiasuf7RWbvUtwa3uZ27 iW8Tj/cZn50ezHqi2QFaYS1v22rEHfaj14Zyf+K1r6Y/VHIA/3R8k/14e0=
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/lsNdWJqkr_B-d-F-i5Qz7LKU0kI>
Subject: Re: [Teas] A question on the definitions of SDP and SAP
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, 21 Mar 2022 12:38:33 -0000

So, yes. Well read, Greg, to spot the similarity. Thanks, Med, for pointing up the text.

 

Are we all happy?

 

A

 

From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> 
Sent: 21 March 2022 11:50
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>; Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>; opsawg <opsawg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: A question on the definitions of SDP and SAP

 

Hi Greg, 

 

The slice draft already says the following: 

 

      An SDP may be abstracted as a Service Attachment Point (SAP)

      [I-D.ietf-opsawg-sap] for the purpose generalizing the concept

      across multiple service types and representing it in management

      and configuration systems.

 

Cheers,

Med

 

De : Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com <mailto:gregimirsky@gmail.com> > 
Envoyé : lundi 21 mars 2022 12:17
À : Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk <mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk> >; TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org <mailto:teas@ietf.org> >; opsawg <opsawg@ietf.org <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> >; BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com <mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> >
Objet : A question on the definitions of SDP and SAP

 

Hi Adrian,

I've read the draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices/>  (many thanks for all your work on it!) and I've got a question. It appears to me that the definition of a Service Demarcation Point section 2.1) as the point of where the IETF Network Slice service is delivered by the provider to a customer is similar to the definition of a Service Attachment Point in draft-ietf-opsawg-sap <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-sap/>  as an "abstraction of the network reference points where network services can be delivered to customers." Hence my question. Is there an intended difference between SDP and SAP that is indicated by using different terms?

 

Regards,

Greg

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
 
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
 
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.