Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt

Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin@yahoo.com> Sun, 07 February 2021 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <i_bryskin@yahoo.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 BA2063A133F for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:07:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yahoo.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 AbsSjX-ASExu for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:06:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sonic303-22.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (sonic303-22.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [66.163.188.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EBE63A133B for <teas@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:06:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1612732015; bh=lvcTRfc8W531cG7Ge3Oz5icC/B8J5o9vw7ul46hayL4=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Reply-To; b=PC/qxOHhCfOValTWimciv6ELxjwOhzhIEVBQsh1qJyJnEdMyq+w7zAFIo61LPRjLDLz1brwaeWacoQksl37nDGnJW8X37dMHxj9adPBvVS6MDAD3Azfta6LZI2+YR2Lcb0iQHkt4H9ormPvCCycOJw/vSU7zamBFkss7YlnJZBpTaF5siNiudrcIJnkZpnZDeOWPhAOtr5w3KrhasLhI/oSqXifK7fEGgtfWe9ZMK4DGEc3Clqsr7idA8Z8PdxaYAEOfB3u9zpLKnESFvgxbBOfQSb1djZBii/Kicd3dGTdyTTTBdilJSVCSPeAXKToMzfwzNBomGeDrhhUS2a5kTw==
X-SONIC-DKIM-SIGN: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1612732015; bh=REEyBWJWHlmhGV6Vav1Mv9iFiaEoIZJHlQvadM2FQXI=; h=X-Sonic-MF:From:To:Subject:Date:From:Subject; b=hDhoZ4auWsEpQ50MHI7EMd4qKJy+aiX2JdpXB2L0v2edymkCN42LL9AwTonkkGO3rixS9KWw/xGnYxX1a/xDDZrwxnDATDbZFlherAhm5RDz4AN5wUL1dNm1T+FOY0HHRejMuBfIqn2tijVfvkTHaCX557bg1uFaZPUZiTuBUK7FdSZHIZKYjD0FhvUsnRp1wRnilm+FHHH3MJfnCjmcOWKZ+F3baSDs4BUoKlR9Zb73LLNCnwm1ZeQIHMSyJWsHEFVHkVOUWL1NaTYfIDrvtZs2KatpASPVeUTZiQOMILdhoejQivXrb9i7SLj8y6WnHs6/PJnq00myGvGtxfSIMw==
X-YMail-OSG: zg8dxbUVM1mQ7h0sogllapzNe60.tJ4JQyCq5hea8u1qM4F7nU9eEiMDCYTpo8o xzHhZGgnuYsvuI2ZG7GuXLmvgffVCyky0gLJ83X.zn6rrPe0hrPM81q9j.rpojjeq9z.plJ1DhGQ Qh9jNn2veUomrS.C02wyjKItLDxx93c2zxuy.w_FyhnRQ8NmaqRjqEEklDzdO5Q9cGdyM95YJgKl KHf6s32DDNoiY0WcHHk33gyqX1P7jPBihrcFX35ZvXUkUbfO9uNSG9rRTV3icAIKgFHwuyT3iNBD bT3Sxi8sBYZQgfVhW1bxL2oVJAwlO_8oMRCWf7bJCmJlzHT7iiry_dSGRcMhHbFSRQgqIsQmS3u6 n93Kt5VRW8HjhesPtu0lETlKFiinJRUQvBxkmsXryIQI_2C8mqDhp3u3oqskTs7IHaOsRkpwP5Fw wx3vntdcwM1DcNbNL_4bgbsav5_sBLw8L0qlEWE6CXOx2azKhFJSc3hukvubVYS2Bv1IqhckSiy6 NvdZY5eWFEJVYLCUztkasW3tGU5Y3bnpa5OOyq8xj7LAjol8N3X5Zhd5jbhwFIzUcYESLz1U7J4u QDVaXPgBYifqrmtmWxhLYPiCTDrNcKR0lv1B663KsJ4hdF5hDOgIDdHYPl4wsHYIwO.kJdCJBZdK 6reMMyf38oF8_QAFy6QiRavE4KNXBo_e7e50xuX.8So5r2DJlP0FgYntIXdokNBduosMpaQmN1Fv W17cFAH92r2hLxLk0DQpqXB1chGaGiEvaHHtaOAnPJu5rBQxEnrkUmYRTbJlkVXN8PB9ZAxcxUUx xtLoNLHp.Llebk1Q0mXITNhuoT.Vyrgf3i21qg6njjdISG.3L_qVbD8I8PW1IzJ1fiKAJPloxCT9 5.OFgQ4pMRkMp6chy.xXb4E1HOM7jKjgowzbLLqR_1aUF0tvs5AsoQ2plUHQmQDgriDLpRMuS7Fe OHvfs1lt_ALvfuqMbfF_aBZE.Ee2hVEqCyxLhNmrzYLbBmiU.dB5oMmZKuhOg4NFiWPd4LK8crkm 4pjpr.rskD3rwNsU2oAFiXCzenO63z2IpsXOzS4os1RoMIaJ1S_tTkUxbW8ZjIErvEWtW5EWYFiS HgCJfOwFyZDRBC04.zKwtYz44vd7xVWKayLbmx67X.58mCdBsZlIQK3Z8f99wThRAbF3WwvtOaCB fIhht0y7fAcWUtitC7F2B.gUjVVam_eYWDgZbZnxVr6ZlbCifLA.5y7yLgGrXExWw6CJ6UQVldm_ a.DdGRmJqbXqpkUV7NyArdkF7jq3FddpI9SBCsAjwXx1WuxISSz7W_YsccyJUcDX716XU9S416Cr dnhoizfpOWuAfDAi2XbyTq5zY5g2Vrncx_19_MfbElNhNKPFTjOSln7l3LrbEIgJ1U8atjtGOzxn uXxiBcsM3Cz2VgOQDbm48EPOvRv3Uo9jEtmwK8kAhnNLy8z38ebIFBuzJ0klO_f6DrgFVLo22BvW bGODnDBOBXw1OMa.UeHisu_i1pBeezZqwXD22IYgjtFxL5bgfmqYTj3dI0lubCgRt8Ad5Go549pT XAp03mq2bxvDUDj0FUR2SfC5uB.hxMu8RO8kzlGhKmLmEgTJonacloVROq5S1UrH79aPXT_Pac71 GjTCI3IwirhmpHH261fY0VAfQdB_7c30oB3vCaGB7jj9FerKWFBXyP653qdeZMy8XFXSXSp.SKE1 4lKPFtYkSoAgyqu50nvHV41x9YWfLRUL5hSHgCTF9HYVPiTXPjGGe3h4Jyz9zeZdD.5_Okr1rw5z ECDAsTsye96amfwWyrLK74BxBaO8QMCXHRAsyqVTgAqgD5B0.76OnRY8l1RZPoEiGtPIVJPm4rV1 tuscxog2jw1WqrNZFN3joJGNUaUCQFEieSIBKz2WJ_Hw_Lb00g9jQYdiYeHnnNAC7fPiD9oO2B18 JIvLe3UKBXammi2RbvPBTX3v0Ker.OcZcOSupAGjD35tCha28UnHaZBBGt.r5Sn7FaxWdCevfstc V8EHvl_JZC2aFqQz9SXobSiduENYCzUOCcxI2lAlOg6gjqbWcWC7AZBEzwukO5koWLfRzqfNT5C0 4k8txLyCbBPGUINeKmapj2TI0PdFmso6EIIaDJLedw2zGL41MDZXqH9GZi4KzMPYuVjphczoy0H8 9AdX3TNdD1oLoz.TmfUeKIY5rZ28m2KFluG7LtMloyM2veRrjSDHH.4Y3loDcDGbz0jigXcxr1sP qcAKWgiEfjWeyzquUyvdowNqjv3ze9FZcTlqYOAL0rRejz6mfqxXJalyIny6waWUQqxOCzQDP2bB _waeRMoM8fNaCPr4xMcuvOpHCksYaCm8IXXb2EB.WC5cygiKnoBucusgxqXw1HXrUMC_shvHWra5 QhfPLEuIgQ9JDYc0NfKK0DLUUBLdlRo_5FVNPVc2sDQJKhRhX5FzZ0rMa4lfNEMbtjhM4WE2WUcn 4AzLxyhj0mZZg89PdutIlxR.gCdU4wd0Sgn2AsvQQs51divcKGbhqQtAbsYLZkCJwOlpqP5OgyrJ qZ4U2o7BAP4NF64Ee.sgEA7fa_.51MpZrb4d6tBReltIaauqwXUOfnANOkzlfkYBZPEAgbCEsrQ_ T_Aj_doNy5BMhXXeHIg--
X-Sonic-MF: <i_bryskin@yahoo.com>
Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic303.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with HTTP; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 21:06:55 +0000
Received: by smtp401.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (VZM Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID 73c6004b4e935aac062f325f717f836b; Sun, 07 Feb 2021 21:06:51 +0000 (UTC)
From: Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin@yahoo.com>
To: Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin=40yahoo.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
CC: TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt
Thread-Index: ATAyMzcwz1nVZ13L8uB/thznweqMNTNGMjQ3UVJUcWlRVFcxN8bm4pNmgAAyJgCAAB+cfIAACV6AgAALhnmAAA8sAIAAA6Pa
X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2021 21:06:50 +0000
Message-ID: <BN6PR16MB168398BBA8F6706A770EFBE3A0B09@BN6PR16MB1683.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
References: <160866255058.12375.3624366295025144530@ietfa.amsl.com> <B5853097-0690-45E9-9123-6F74FBCC4F03@juniper.net> <CABNhwV1u=iiK_2PQTKCquDbVwXanbTfB7U5GEzNRcgNY=iHhqQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+YzgTvrk7bXDzyChjy1HORbAdb6XWLhaWpZP=gTbXUhTs3+3Q@mail.gmail.com> <BN6PR16MB1683FD38A7080E2BDAC114B0A0B09@BN6PR16MB1683.namprd16.prod.outlook.com> <CA+YzgTuqj7W7=oz3M1m7Pys9P5xSPm9+QCA1WRPiYUoyBhbWDQ@mail.gmail.com> <BN6PR16MB1683185500A8DF1FDE745D6FA0B09@BN6PR16MB1683.namprd16.prod.outlook.com> <c1870f42-f7ab-9e09-a0a0-2125469c4fc8@joelhalpern.com> <BN6PR16MB1683FAFC90E125D756F0F466A0B09@BN6PR16MB1683.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>, <4356b8aa-f6af-586d-3bfc-9c57ffdffe61@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <4356b8aa-f6af-586d-3bfc-9c57ffdffe61@joelhalpern.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SCL: -1
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-MS-Exchange-Organization-RecordReviewCfmType: 0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BN6PR16MB168398BBA8F6706A770EFBE3A0B09BN6PR16MB1683namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.17648 mail.backend.jedi.jws.acl:role.jedi.acl.token.atz.jws.hermes.yahoo Apache-HttpAsyncClient/4.1.4 (Java/11.0.8)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/r7fcnhZOb9pZ7bwm-Pla4wF2Nvo>
Subject: Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt
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, 07 Feb 2021 21:07:01 -0000

This means that you define slice as logical/abstract single node, rather than logical network. Agree?

Igor

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

________________________________
From: Teas <teas-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2021 3:50:34 PM
To: Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin=40yahoo.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt

As John Drake pointed out, the TEAS proposal (adotped WG document, but
not completed document)is that the slice client expresses its needs in
terms of the behavior (generally QoS / SLO terms) it requires.  The IETF
Network slice implementation delivers that.  The client does not need or
want to see the internal topology.

Depending upon the requirements, the IETF Network Slice implementation
may or may not be able to aggregate the traffic into internal artifacts.
  The assumption, which matches the vast majority of use cases, is that
it will be able to aggregate.

Yours,
Joel

On 2/7/2021 3:06 PM, Igor Bryskin wrote:
> Thanks Joel,
> So, you are saying that a slice client has no say as to how its packets
> forwarded / treated by the network. There is no even  need to expose the
> slice topology in some form to the client, because the client can't do
> much with such information,  correct?
> Also, can you envision a use case when a slice topological elements may
> have independent name space?
>
> Thanks,
> Igor
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Teas <teas-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Joel M. Halpern
> <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 7, 2021 2:15:01 PM
> *To:* Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin=40yahoo.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> *Cc:* TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for
> draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt
> I disagree.
> The edge of the domain receives and classifies the packet.  It can use
> any information it can to decide what aggregate the slice belongs in.
> Once that is done, the IETF network slice implementation network should
> simply obey the instruction as to what aggregate the packet belongs in.
>    The carrying network does not need to care about the external network
> slices.  And by avoiding such concern, all the parts scale better and we
> get a clean division of responsibility.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 2/7/2021 1:58 PM, Igor Bryskin wrote:
>> Pavan,
>>
>> I assume:
>> - that a node, generally speaking, needs to make a forwarding decision
>> based on the packet's slice topology;
>> - said topology may change dynamically, and so is the slice membership
>> in the slice aggregate.
>> Therefore. It is better, in my opinion, to carry slice ID in packets and
>> let nodes (re-)define slice aggregate membership independently.
>>
>> Igor
>>
>> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36 <https://aka.ms/ghei36>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Teas <teas-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Vishnu Pavan Beeram
>> <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 7, 2021, 11:48 AM
>> *To:* Igor Bryskin
>> *Cc:* Tarek Saad; Gyan Mishra; TEAS WG;
>> draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet@ietf.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for
>> draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt
>>
>> Igor, Hi!
>>
>> Please see inline.
>>
>> Regards,
>> -Pavan (as a co-author)
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 8:03 AM Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin@yahoo.com
>> <mailto:i_bryskin@yahoo.com <mailto:i_bryskin@yahoo.com>>> wrote:
>>
>>     Gyan and Pavan,
>>
>>     When a packet arrives at a node participating in a multi-slice
>>     network, the packet needs to be treated and *routed* according to
>>     the slice it belongs to. Because the physical data link over which
>>     the packet has arrived could be used by more than one slices, the
>>     packet needs to carry somewhere the slice ID. IMHO because the slice
>>     topology may dynamically change, it would be simpler and cleaner to
>>     carry the slice ID, rather than slice aggregate ID, as suggested by
>>     the draft.
>>
>>
>> [VPB] The packet needs to carry some identifier that would help
>> determine the specific forwarding treatment (scheduling and drop policy)
>> to be applied before the packet is forwarded further (this is not needed
>> in the "Control Plane Slice Policy" mode). In the model that is proposed
>> in the draft, we have one or more IETF Network Slices mapped onto a
>> single slice aggregate and each slice aggregate has a specific Per Hop
>> Behavior associated with it. In other words, the packet needs to carry
>> an identifier that maps onto the slice aggregate. Also note that in the
>> proposed model, multiple slice aggregates can map onto the same topology.
>>
>>
>>     I also agree with Gyan that the COS field may not be the best choice
>>     for the task.
>>
>>
>> [VPB] I'm not sure what you mean by the COS field here.  If there is a
>> need to allow differentiation of forwarding treatments for packets
>> within a slice aggregate, the slice aggregate traffic may further carry
>> a Diffserv Class Selector.
>>
>>
>>     Regards,
>>     Igor
>>
>>     Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36 <https://aka.ms/ghei36>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     *From:* Teas <teas-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org>>>
>>     on behalf of Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:vishnupavan@gmail.com <mailto:vishnupavan@gmail.com>>>
>>     *Sent:* Thursday, February 4, 2021 3:49:37 PM
>>     *To:* Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com <mailto:hayabusagsm@gmail.com <mailto:hayabusagsm@gmail.com>>>
>>     *Cc:* Tarek Saad <tsaad=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org
>>     <mailto:40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org <mailto:40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>>>;
>>     draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet@ietf.org
>>     <mailto:draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet@ietf.org
> <mailto:draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet@ietf.org>>
>>     <draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet@ietf.org
>>     <mailto:draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet@ietf.org
> <mailto:draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet@ietf.org>>>; TEAS WG
>>     <teas@ietf.org <mailto:teas@ietf.org <mailto:teas@ietf.org>>>
>>     *Subject:* Re: [Teas] FW: New Version Notification for
>>     draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt
>>     Gyan, Hi!
>>
>>     Thanks for taking the time to review the document. Please see inline
>>     for responses (prefixed VPB).
>>
>>     Regards,
>>     -Pavan (as a co-author)
>>
>>     On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 8:14 PM Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:hayabusagsm@gmail.com <mailto:hayabusagsm@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>         Dear authors
>>
>>         I reviewed the draft and have some comments.
>>
>>         I noticed the draft  name and throughout the document it
>>         mentions Network Slice in IP/MPLS networks and wonder if it
>>         would be more appropriate to say network slice in SR/MPLS
>>         networks.  As NS involves traffic steering either RSVP-TE or SR
>>         steering my thoughts are it would be appropriate
>>
>>
>>     [VPB] I’m not sure if I understood the comment. As you are aware,
>>     Segment Routing can be instantiated on MPLS or IPv6 dataplanes. The
>>     solution proposed in draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet is intended for
>>     realizing network slicing in IP(v4/v6) / MPLS networks. The proposed
>>     solution works with any type of path control technology (e.g.RSVP-TE
>>     paths, SR paths, FlexAlgo paths). If you are interested in how the
>>     proposed solution works in SR deployments, please refer to
>>     draft-bestbar-spring-scalable-ns.
>>
>>
>>         This drafts main focus it seems is an example of NS using QOS CS
>>         selector marking Differential service to be used for network
>>         slicing.
>>
>>
>>
>>     [VPB] Not really. The focus in this document is on the Slice Policy
>>     construct which includes rules that control the following slice
>>     aggregate attributes:
>>     - Data plane policies (Slice Selectors, QOS profiles)
>>     - Control plane policies (Guaranteed BW, Reservation priorities)
>>     - Topology membership policies (Customized/Pre-defined)
>>
>>     There are 3 types of Slice Policy Modes depending on how/where the
>>     shared network resources are partitioned –
>>     (1) Data Plane Slice Policy Mode
>>     (2) Control Plane Slice Policy Mode
>>     (3) Data and Control Plane Slice Policy Mode
>>
>>     In modes (1) and (3), a Slice Selector (SS) is carried in the packet
>>     to identify the slice aggregate and apply specific forwarding
>>     treatment (scheduling treatment and drop probability). But this is
>>     not needed in mode (2).
>>
>>         In my mind QOS is completely orthogonal to the concept of
>>         network slicing.  QOS involves shared resources and traffic
>>         classification and scheduling based on shared pipe resources
>>         which is completely orthogonal to network slicing which is a
>>         cross section of underlying resources involving a degree of
>>         isolation during provisioning to meet a customer  SLA.  QOS has
>>         been around for a long time and the big downside to QOS is that
>>         it is independent of underlying network resources.
>>
>>         When QOS PHB scheduling occurs based on CS AF or EF selector,
>>         packet are marked at the edge of trust boundary and PHB hop by
>>         hop scheduled matching dscp value providing bandwidth guarantees
>>         for profile traffic at or below the scheduling bandwidth which
>>         is based on the shared physical link.
>>
>>
>>
>>     [VPB] As noted above, it is certainly possible for a network slicing
>>     solution to be put together without requiring a specific
>>     per-hop-behavior to be applied on packets belonging to a slice
>>     aggregate (we refer to this as “Control Plane Slice Policy Mode” -
>>     Section 4.2 of draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01). However, there are
>>     cases where the Slice service requires strict QOS guarantees and
>>     differentiation from other traffic – this is where the Data Plane
>>     Slice Policy Mode comes into play.
>>
>>         Kind Regards
>>
>>         Gyan
>>
>>
>>         On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 1:59 PM Tarek Saad
>>         <tsaad=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org
>>         <mailto:40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org
> <mailto:40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>>> wrote:
>>
>>             Hi WG,____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             We have published a new revision of this draft (just in time
>>             for your holidays reading).____
>>
>>             The changes include:____
>>
>>               * additional co-authors have joined____
>>               * introduction of new terms “slice policy” and “slice
>>                 aggregate”____
>>               * editorial nits to align with new terms introduced____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             As usual, reviews and comments are welcome.____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             Regards,____
>>
>>             Tarek (on behalf of co-authors)____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             On 12/22/20, 1:42 PM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org
>>             <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>>"
> <internet-drafts@ietf.org
>>             <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>>>
> wrote:____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>                  [External Email. Be cautious of content]____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>                  A new version of I-D,
>>             draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt____
>>
>>                  has been successfully submitted by Tarek Saad and
>>             posted to the____
>>
>>                  IETF repository.____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>                  Name:           draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet____
>>
>>                  Revision:       01____
>>
>>                  Title:          Realizing Network Slices in IP/MPLS
>>             Networks____
>>
>>                  Document date:  2020-12-22____
>>
>>                  Group:          Individual Submission____
>>
>>                  Pages:          27____
>>
>>                  URL:
>>             https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPzvuhQQRw$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPzvuhQQRw$>
>>             <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPzvuhQQRw$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPzvuhQQRw$>>____
>>
>>                  Status:
>>             https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPwWnIEvoQ$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPwWnIEvoQ$>
>>             <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPwWnIEvoQ$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPwWnIEvoQ$>>____
>>
>>                  Htmlized:
>>             https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPxBddbTdg$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPxBddbTdg$>
>>             <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPxBddbTdg$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPxBddbTdg$>>____
>>
>>                  Htmlized:
>>             https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPznNKoLDg$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPznNKoLDg$>
>>             <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPznNKoLDg$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPznNKoLDg$>>____
>>
>>                  Diff:
>>             https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPzsN9oeaw$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPzsN9oeaw$>
>>             <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPzsN9oeaw$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-01__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UopixISsH-6laFtUNIg5vIaLsXzFthS8C65TCDCRk-5ayO6AAa-8IPzsN9oeaw$>>____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>                  Abstract:____
>>
>>                     Network slicing provides the ability to partition a
>>             physical network____
>>
>>                     into multiple logical networks of varying sizes,
>>             structures, and____
>>
>>                     functions so that each slice can be dedicated to
>>             specific services or____
>>
>>                     customers.  Network slices need to operate in
>>             parallel while____
>>
>>                     providing slice elasticity in terms of network
>>             resource allocation.____
>>
>>                     The Differentiated Service (Diffserv) model allows
>>             for carrying____
>>
>>                     multiple services on top of a single physical
>>             network by relying on____
>>
>>                     compliant nodes to apply specific forwarding
>>             treatment (scheduling____
>>
>>                     and drop policy) on to packets that carry the
>>             respective Diffserv____
>>
>>                     code point.  This document proposes a solution based
>>             on the Diffserv____
>>
>>                     model to realize network slicing in IP/MPLS
>>             networks.____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>                  Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from
>>             the time of submission____
>>
>>                  until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>>             tools.ietf.org <http://tools.ietf.org <http://tools.ietf.org>>.____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>                  The IETF Secretariat____
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>             __ __
>>
>>
>>             Juniper Business Use Only
>>
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             Teas mailing list
>>             Teas@ietf.org <mailto:Teas@ietf.org <mailto:Teas@ietf.org>>
>>             https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>
>>             <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>>
>>
>>         --
>>
>>         <http://www.verizon.com/ <http://www.verizon.com/>>
>>
>>         *Gyan Mishra*
>>
>>         /Network Solutions A//rchitect /
>>
>>         /M 301 502-1347
>>         13101 Columbia Pike
>>         /Silver Spring, MD
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Teas mailing list
>>         Teas@ietf.org <mailto:Teas@ietf.org <mailto:Teas@ietf.org>>
>>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>
>>         <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
> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> 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
>

_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
Teas@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas