On 11/07/2016 14:39, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 11 July 2016 14:16
To: Michael Behringer (mbehring) <[email protected]>; Laurent Ciavaglia
<[email protected]>; anima <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-du-anima-an-
intent-04.txt
On 11/07/2016 19:22, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Anima [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian E
Carpenter
Sent: 09 July 2016 12:39
To: Laurent Ciavaglia <[email protected]>; anima
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Fwd: New Version Notification for
draft-du-anima-an- intent-04.txt
Yes. There's been an assumption, I think, that one "autonomic function" ==
one ASA.
We need to be clear if that is an axiom, and we need to think about how
ASAs are named, and if those names need to be registered somehow.
Yes, that misunderstanding keeps popping up all the time. I think RFC7575 is
quite clear:
Autonomic Function: A feature or function that requires no
configuration and can derive all required information through self-
knowledge, discovery, or Intent.
Autonomic Service Agent: An agent implemented on an autonomic node
that implements an autonomic function, either in part (in the case of
a distributed function) or whole.
Example: There is the "autonomic function" "bootstrapping of new nodes". It
consists of 3 different ASAs: The new_device ASA, the proxy ASA and the registrar ASA.
Michael: in your example, the agents represent different parts of the AF
functionality.
There is an additional dimension: an AF can be deployed over multiple
resources(/devices). An ASA, encompassing the whole AF functionality,
would then be instantiated on each device. E.g. a load-balancing AF
deployed over a set of routers (each router will get an ASA of the load
balancing AF).
How can we make that clearer? (I thought RFC7575 *is* clear).
I think that progressing on the life-cycle management will describe how
the different elements (AF, ASA, management functions) interacts and
when/why/how they are instantiated. This will be presented (again) with
more details in IETF96/Berlin.
The other discussion thread on the "code" thing is also useful to get a
better understanding IMO.
finally, the text on ASA in the reference model (or larger side
document) could be used to augment / improve the text of RFC7575.
Best regards, Laurent.
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
