Hi Linda, From my perspective, the Attachment Circuit (AC) model can support the dynamic establishment of logical connections between the Edge Cloud DC Gateway and Provider Edge (PE), as outlined in your example. However, it is not designed to support UCMP (Unequal Cost Multipath) load-balancing policies. The current capability of the AC model lies in applying application-specific QoS policies where required. For detailed answers, please see inline responses below.
Regards, Bo From: Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@futurewei.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 9, 2025 9:57 AM To: neo...@ietf.org; Chongfeng Xie <xie...@chinatelecom.cn>; opsawg <opsawg@ietf.org> Subject: [neotec] Questions on Applying the Attachment Circuit YANG Model to Neotec’s Dynamic Network Scheduling Use Case Bo and Co-authors of the AC: I have some questions regarding how the Attachment Circuit YANG model (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit/ ) could be used to support a simplified version of the use case described in China telecom’s Neotec side meeting ( https://github.com/xiechf974/Neotec-Side-Meeting-IETF-122/blob/main/5-Cloud-aware%20Network%20Operation%20for%20AI%20Services-Qiong%20Sun.pdf) Scenario: Let’s assume there are 10 Edge Cloud sites. An AI model for city surveillance (e.g., detecting traffic congestion or garbage classification) needs to be deployed dynamically to some of these sites in response to real-time events. Step 1: The Cloud Manager needs to query the network connectivity characteristics (bandwidth, latency, topology constraints, etc.) between street cameras (or gateways, eNB that connect to those street cameras) and candidate Edge Cloud sites in order to determine the optimal locations for AI model deployment. Step 2: Based on the information gathered, the Cloud Manager decides to deploy the City Surveillance AI module in 4 of the 10 Edge Cloud sites. Question 1: If the selected 4 Edge cloud sites already have connectivity set up to their respective PEs (e.g., ACs are already provisioned), does this mean that only the Edge Cloud gateways need to be updated to advertise the new service (e.g., AI module prefixes)? If an IGP is already running within the Edge Cloud data center, is there anything else the network controller needs to configure? [Bo Wu] In general, yes. If assuming the mentioned network controller is a WAN controller, and the WAN connectivity for these new services (e.g., L2/L3 VPNs and ACs) has already been provisioned, then the Edge Cloud DC Gateway could leverage BGP to advertise IP prefixes for the new services. Question 2: Suppose the AI modules in the 4 Edge Cloud sites need to exchange large volumes of data with strict performance constraints (e.g., XX Gbps bandwidth and YY ms latency). The goal is to have the network controller dynamically adjust UCMP (Unequal Cost Multipath) load-balancing algorithms on all the nodes along the paths interconnecting those 4 sites. Can the Attachment Circuit YANG model be used to achieve this dynamic path optimization? (I think that AC YANG model is NOT meant for this purpose, am I correct?) Does IETF have specified those YANG model to achieve this goal? [Bo Wu] I think the AC model is not suitable for dynamic load balancing policies. Furthermore, I'm uncertain whether cloud managers would request such load balancing policies to WAN controller. Are load balancing policies considered as implementation-specific techniques of WAN controllers? Or, might cloud managers instead require specific bandwidth, latency, and packet loss guarantees for individual flows (e.g., 5-tuple-based flows), rather than requesting load balancing policies directly? Would be great to hear your thoughts on how these models might evolve to support this use case, or whether augmentations to the AC model are being considered in this direction. Thank you very much Linda From: Wubo (lana) <lana.wubo=40huawei....@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:lana.wubo=40huawei....@dmarc.ietf.org>> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2025 12:21 AM To: neo...@ietf.org<mailto:neo...@ietf.org> Subject: [neotec] Some background information on cloud-network interfaces Hello everyone, Here are some IETF drafts related to cloud-network interaction for your reference: 1) The orchestration architecture between cloud DC and WAN networks, for example, the reference architecture provided by 5G IP/MPLS for 5G slicing scenarios. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-5g-ns-ip-mpls-16#section-3.4.2 2) Dynamic network attachments for NFs (Network Functions), for example, in the AC service model, how NFs Deployment, and NF Failure and Scale-Out: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit-20#name-connectivity-of-cloud-netwo 3) In current realization, APIs are consumed by Cloud systems rather than IETF-defined NETCONF/RESTCONF/YANG, example could be: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-grow-peering-api-00 Thanks, Bo 发件人: Wubo (lana) 发送时间: 2025年3月19日 14:36 收件人: 'neo...@ietf.org' <neo...@ietf.org<mailto:neo...@ietf.org>> 主题: Slides of gap analysis on Telcom cloud network interfaces Hello everyone, Here is the Telcom cloud network interface gap analysis that I mentioned in the side meeting. The link: https://github.com/xiechf974/Neotec-Side-Meeting-IETF-122/blob/main/6-Neotec%20gap%20analysis%20Bo%20Wu.pdf This analysis is intended to identify the gaps between the interfaces expected by Neotec and the existing IETF service models and network models. The analysis references ETSI NFV standards and documents related to WIM (WAN Infrastructure Manager). I think WIM interface is related to the Interface 2 we discussed, which covers the interface requirements and candidate IETF YANG models exposed from network to the cloud. I have also added some newly defined IETF network slices and AC service & network models to show some new candidate IETF YANG models. I hope this analysis is helpful. Thanks, Bo
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
