Re: [tequila/sls] Issues for the BoF

From: Carlos Alberto Kamienski (cak@cin.ufpe.br)
Date: Mon Nov 20 2000 - 13:12:41 CET

  • Next message: Yves T'Joens: "Re: FW: IETF 49 SLS BoF issues"

    Raju, Yves

    I have two comments:

    1. I didn't see it in the questions you raised, but will this work focus
       on diffserv SLSs ? Although it is a good idea to have something to
       begin with (and diffserv is a good candidate) I think SLS discussion at
       IETF should concentrate on QoS guarantees a user/application could
       expect and not on a specific QoS technology.

    2. I would suggest to include some aspects of end to end service
       deployment. I understand this is a provider's job and there could be
       potentially lots of ways to do this, but I would like to see at least
       some guidelines on this topic.

    Regards

    Carlos

    On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Raju Rajan wrote:

    > Hi all,
    >
    > Yves and I have put together a preliminary list of issues that would help
    > focus the BoF, and suggest directions/guidelines for a working group. (This
    > is not an exhaustive list of all technical SLS related issues; just those
    > that will help define a charter and work-items.)
    >
    > It would be good if we could get some discussion on the list around these
    > basic questions. Please feel free to suggest some more. Based on the
    > discussion here, we will send a revised list to the speakers/participants at
    > the BoF, and ask them to address some or all aspects below.
    >
    > NOTE: We're trying to get a representative group of experts, potential users
    > and vendors for the BoF to help us all better understand the technical and
    > commecial directions. Please contact Yves or myself with any suggestions. In
    > particular, speakers with expertise in the Service Provider, carrier or
    > solution provider domains would be great! (Please be understanding of time
    > constraints while suggesting names.)
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Raju and Yves
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > -------------------------------
    >
    > Question 1: Is there a need to standardize the syntax and semantics of QoS
    > Service Level negotiation on the following interfaces.
    > - intra-domain interfaces (typical example would be a softswitch interface
    > towards the network management platform for automatic sizing of trunks
    > between voice gateways)?
    > - inter-domain interfaces for the customer-provider relationship (typical
    > example would be allowing an automated VPN configuration be flexible managed
    > by the customer on the provider domain) ?
    > - inter-domain QoS provisioning for the provider-provider relationship
    > (typical example would be to extend the above over multiple IP service
    > providers)
    >
    > Question 2 : Do you see any use for it in the timeframe that a working group
    > would deliver (Feb 2002)? The alternative is to leave it to each vendor to
    > reach agreements with their customers, or to postpone work on this to a
    > later date after 2002.
    >
    > Question 3: If there is a need to standardize, should this be done in the
    > IETF?
    >
    > Question 4: Which of the following should be the deliverables of the working
    > group?
    > - Framework document (including architecture)
    > - Protocol independent SLS information model document
    > - Negotiation Requirements and Semantics document
    > - Interface protocol standardization (e.g. XML/LDAP/....)
    > - others ?
    >
    > Question 5: Would your organisation be willing to actively contribute to
    > this effort ?
    >
    > ++++++++++++++++
    > Some more technically oriented questions (answer if you feel comfortable and
    > have an explicit technology choice, otherwise skip this section).
    >
    > Question 5: what should be the protocol independent data representation
    > language ?
    > - PCIM
    > - XML
    > - BNF
    > - Any others?
    > Please help us focus on just one or two.
    >
    > Question 6: What are the negotiation protocols that make sense in the
    > environment that you chose?
    > Choices: PPP, WAP, HTTP, SIP, RSVP, shared LDAP directories, COPS, ...
    > Please help us focus on just one or two.
    >
    > Question 7: What negotiation model makes sense in the environment that you
    > chose?
    > Choices:
    > Subscriber signup w/ no confirmation
    > Subscriber signup with confirmation
    > Provider sends menu followed subscriber signup with our without
    > confirmation
    > Provider sends menu followed by subscriber signup with confirmation and
    > monitoring updates
    > Provider sends menu followed by more complex negotiation process with
    > confirmation and monitoring updates and potential re-negotiation
    > Any others ...
    > Again, please help us focus.
    >
    > Question 8: Which formats make sense for documentation of the syntax of
    > negotiation elements?
    > Choices: XML DDTs, LDAP schemata, COPS PIBs, PPP elements (?), RSVP Policy
    > Elements, ...
    > Focus, focus, focus ;)
    >
    > Question 9: any other comments/questions/hints ?
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 20 2000 - 13:13:53 CET