[DV] see inlines
*From: *spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of "Shah,
Himanshu" <hs...@ciena.com>
*Date: *Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 9:23 PM
*To: *Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.i...@gmail.com>, Daniel Bernier
<daniel.bern...@bell.ca>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decra...@orange.com>,
"spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
*Cc: *"Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aret...@cisco.com>,
"spring-cha...@ietf.org" <spring-cha...@ietf.org>
*Subject: *Re: [spring] [**EXTERNAL**] Re: SPRING - rechartering
discussion
Agree with Jeff, without harping on all the good reasons already
stated for SPRING WG charter extensions,
I would think that it would be beneficial to leverage TE expertise
from TEAS WG to
progress SR-TE there for a cohesive, uniform solution for all
tunneling schemes.
[DV] 1- SRTE is NOT a tunnel. Labels are signals straight in the IGP,
as known. This is why the word “policy” was introduce with SRTE –
“SRTE Policy”.
[DV] 2- According to TEAS WG charter -
https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/teas/about/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/teas/about/>:
1. Definition of additional abstract service, link, and path
properties such as jitter, delay, and diversity. Extensions
to IGPs to advertise these properties, and _extensions to
RSVP-TE _to request and to accumulate these properties.
[DV] 3- also notice in the SPRING Charter -
https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/spring/about/:
o Some types of network virtualization, including multi-
topology networks and the partitioning of network
resources for VPNs
o Network path and node protection such as fast re-route
o Network programmability
o New OAM techniques
o Simplification and reduction of network signalling
components
o Load balancing and _traffic engineering_
[DV] Hence I believe “SRTE policy” is a key component of the SR
Architecture and should pursued as part as the Architecture
definition milestone of the SPRING WG.
Dan
IMHO..
/Thanks,/
/Himanshu/
*From: *spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Jeff Tantsura
<jefftant.i...@gmail.com>
*Date: *Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 3:26 PM
*To: *"Bernier, Daniel" <daniel.bern...@bell.ca>,
"bruno.decra...@orange.com" <bruno.decra...@orange.com>,
"spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
*Cc: *Alvaro Retana <aret...@cisco.com>, "spring-cha...@ietf.org"
<spring-cha...@ietf.org>
*Subject: *[**EXTERNAL**] Re: [spring] SPRING - rechartering discussion
Hi,
I'm not going to repeat all the valid reasons to continue mentioned
beforehand.
There's definitely work to be done in architecture and O&M areas as
well as co-ordination of various activities across IETF.
Cheers,
Jeff
On 3/18/18, 13:23, "spring on behalf of Bernier, Daniel"
<spring-boun...@ietf.org <mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf
of daniel.bern...@bell.ca <mailto:daniel.bern...@bell.ca>> wrote:
Hi,
I echo the need to continue the SPRING work on service-chaining.
There is a growing interest to have a mechanism that operates at the
forwarding plane level using source routing as an alternative to a
dedicated service overlay. This will surely generate other related
work such as automated service discovery, inter-domain chaining
policies, parallelism versus sequential chaining, various
control-plane implementations, etc.
Secondly, since there is a tight relation to SR chaining and TE
policies, I believe there will is a lot of opportunities related to
Path Awareness which is currently running in IRTF. Opportunities
like, intent translation to SR policies, Policy requests or
announcements between domains and host (probably app) level TE policy
requests (e.g. how can an app receive a proper policy based on its
requirements) ?
My humble operator 0.02 cents.
Daniel Bernier | Bell Canada
________________________________________
From: spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org
<mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of
bruno.decra...@orange.com <mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
<bruno.decra...@orange.com <mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>>
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 11:59 AM
To: spring@ietf.org <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Cc: Alvaro Retana (aretana); spring-cha...@ietf.org
<mailto:spring-cha...@ietf.org>
Subject: [spring] SPRING - rechartering discussion
Hello WG,
now that nearly all the core documents are in the hands of IESG
or beyond, we think it is time to (re)discuss rechartering.
We brought up that question few meetings ago and the feedback, at
that time, was that the WG at least needs to be maintained to
discuss the extensions following deployment feedback.
But we need also identify technical directions.
In order to initiate the discussion we are proposing some high
level items but we'd like to make clear a few points before:
* these are only proposals; what might end-up as the next steps
for SPRING will be what the WG is willing to work on (which includes
having cycles for that).
* what the WG might be rechartered to do is not necessarily
limited to that; so other proposals are welcome.
So, we thought of the following:
* general architectural work / extensions
there are still few items on our plate and we expect that some
might need to be progressed, and we should maybe allow for others to
come.
* service chaining
last meeting there were proposals discussed in SPRING to realize
some form of service chaining. any work in that space would require
close coordination with SFC and maybe other WG.
* yang
we are a bit behind here and there is definitely work to do.
So please comment on these and propose additional items.
We'll likely have a dedicated slot in London but we'd like to
progress before that.
Thank you,
--Martin, Rob, Bruno
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Vigoureux [mailto:martin.vigour...@nokia.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 4:25 PM
> To: spring@ietf.org <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
> Cc: spring-cha...@ietf.org <mailto:spring-cha...@ietf.org>;
Alvaro Retana (aretana)
> Subject: Next steps for SPRING?
>
> WG,
>
> in the session we have opened the discussion on the future of
the WG,
> putting all options on the table (recharter/close/sleep).
> As a foreword, we still have few WG Documents that we need to
-and will-
> push towards IESG (and a greater number that need to reach RFC
status),
> but with those we'll have reached most if not all of our
milestones,
> thus the question on what's next.
>
> So, we think we have heard during the session that closing wasn't
> desired and one reason for that is to have a home to share and
discuss
> deployment considerations as the technology gets deployed.
> There are also a few individual documents knocking at the
door, and some
> of them were presented during the session.
>
> To reach out to everyone, we are thus asking the question on
the list.
> We would like to hear from you all what the working group
should be
> focussing on.
>
> Note, the expectation is that future items should not be
use-cases but
> rather be technology extensions/evolutions.
>
> Thank you
>
> Martin & Bruno
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
