From nobody Sun Nov 15 12:41:38 2020 Return-Path: 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 26AD83A0799; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 12:41:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 xat0CjzPjaSJ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 12:41:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 036BB3A08FA; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 12:41:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A49D6600B9; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 22:41:26 +0200 (EET) Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id axWf9BYw1Aqt; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 22:41:25 +0200 (EET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:1829::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E4006601E4; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 22:41:25 +0200 (EET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Jari Arkko In-Reply-To: <9e8170c6-399b-e954-2abb-5e5f425f172a@joelhalpern.com> Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 22:41:24 +0200 Cc: TEAS WG , draft-nsdt-teas-ietf-network-slice-definition@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <059e01d6b6ce$0f74a830$2e5df890$@olddog.co.uk> <9e8170c6-399b-e954-2abb-5e5f425f172a@joelhalpern.com> To: "Joel M. Halpern" , adrian@olddog.co.uk X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Teas] Thoughts about draft-nsdt-teas-ietf-network-slice-definition and isolation X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 20:41:38 -0000 > Thank you Adrian. I mostly agree with what you say=20 Thank you Adrian and Joel. For what it is worth, I also agree, and like = Adrian=E2=80=99s suggested wording (and Joel=E2=80=99s amendment). The = new text would also be more concise and alive the task we need it to do: = explain the importance of the isolation concept and relate it to the = concepts introduced earlier in the document. I think this actually gives enough expressive power to do the most = common things that people request. And if there=E2=80=99s things beyond, = the model is completely extensible with the introduction of additional = SLOs. And I don=E2=80=99t think Adrian mentioned this, but I also thought the = concept of backups/fault tolerance could be an orthogonal, and should = not be mixed with the isolation question. But Adrian=E2=80=99s proposal = solves that too by removing that part of the text. Jari (no hats, just personal opinion)