I2NSF WG:
Need your opinion for a good name to represent "Client Facing Interface" and
"NSF Facing Interface" of the I2NSF reference model:
+-----------------------------------------------------+
| I2NSF Client |
| E.g. Overlay Network Mgnt, Enterprise network Mgnt |
| another network domain's mgnt, etc. |
+----------+------------------------------------------+
|
| Client Facing Interface
|
+-----+---------------+
|Network Operator mgmt| +-------------+
| Security Controller | < --------- > | Developer's |
+----------+----------+ Registration | Mgnt System |
| Interface +-------------+
|
| NSF Facing Interface
|
+----------------------+----------------------------+
| |
| |
+---+--+ +------+ +------+ +--+---+
+ NSF-1+ ------- + NSF-n+ +NSF-1 + ----- +NSF-m + . . .
+------+ +------+ +------+ +------+
Vendor A Vendor B
During the I2NSF early stage (before the WG was created), "capability
interface" was used to represent the interface between controller <-> NSF, and
"service interface" was used to represent the interface between the Client <->
controller.
As many people use the terminologies loosely, the "Capability Interface" being
interchangeably used with "Capability Layer", and "Service Interface" being
interchangeably used with "Service Layer".
The I2NSF Terminology Draft has defined the "Capability Layer" (independent of
which interface to the controller) for exposing the capability of a domain
(over Client Facing Interface), or for exposing the capability of a NSF (over
the NSF Facing Interface).
By this definition, ECA Policy's "Event" capability can be discovered
independently from the "Condition" capability, or "Action" capability.
Therefore, continue using the "Capability Interface" can cause more confusion
in the future as its sound is too close to the "Capability layer".
Therefore, we are asking people to state which of the following options should
be used:
1. Use "Client Facing Interface" for "Client <-> controller"; and "NSF
Facing Interface" for "controller <-> NSF",
2. Use "Controller North Bound Interface" for "Client <-> controller"; and
"Controller South Bound Interface" for "controller <-> NSF", or
Or you can provide a better option.
Thanks, Linda
_______________________________________________
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
