Each poll has the same use-cases to develop plus the extras.

There are three periods for small group meetings and thus 3 doodle polls.
Each doodle poll represents a different time period. During each period,
there will be many small groups - probably around 15-20, depending on how
people sign up.

Alia
On Apr 21, 2013 6:59 AM, "Jamal Hadi Salim" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Alia,
> The doodle is a little confusing. All 3 have exactly the same columns.
> Isnt each group supposed to have different layout?
> I take it one cant attend all 3 since they run in parallel.
>
> cheers,
> jamal
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Alia Atlas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> First, I'd like to remind everyone that the deadline to register for the
>> interim on April 22 & 23 is tomorrow, April 17.  The registration link is:
>> http://i2rs-interim.eventbrite.com/
>>
>> Second, I've only seen one request for discussing a draft.  This is the
>> perfect and good time to present specific details of use-cases before they
>> go into small groups for discussion. PLEASE do request time - to help be
>> sure people are on the same page.
>>
>> Third, a large portion of the meeting is having focused small group
>> meetings that will then report back to the whole meeting.  The expectation
>> is that all attendees - remote as well as local - will participate in this.
>>  We want your ideas!  There will be Google Hangouts to facilitate the small
>> group meetings involving remote participants.
>>
>> There are three polls to indicate which small groups each person is
>> interested in.  Please sign up.
>> Each small group will have no more than 8 people in it - but we can have
>> duplicate groups that will coordinate.
>> There are about 20 topics for each meeting - it is likely that some will
>> be consolidated.  Please feel free to brainstorm/discuss what other
>> use-cases should be included.  I have generally pulled these from existing
>> individual drafts (as indicated).
>>
>> Poll for Group Meeting 1:
>> http://www.doodle.com/um37p9gds9u72mfd
>>
>> Poll for Group Meeting 2:
>> http://doodle.com/uy9sfsc3kdsmcdut
>>
>> Poll for Group Meeting 3:
>> http://doodle.com/2y85tbwig6hnma46
>>
>> The general structure for the use-case discussions is intended to be:
>> ***
>>
>>     -
>>
>>       First group session:
>>       -
>>
>>          Taxonomy of network applications (to be used in later sessions)
>>          -
>>
>>          Use-cases: clear write-up of idea, how it’s done today,
>>          pros/cons of doing with i2rs
>>          -
>>
>>       Second group session:
>>       -
>>
>>          Use-cases: flesh each out to include information to be read as
>>          well as written and events - so get full feedback loop.  Identify
>>          assumptions about network application associated
>>          -
>>
>>          Communications options taxonomy
>>          -
>>
>>          Authentication & authorization taxonomy
>>          -
>>
>>       Third group session:
>>       -
>>
>>          Use-cases: connect each use-case to the functional requirements
>>          in the i2rs architecture.  What set of features is needed? What 
>> about for
>>          communications?  For authentication and authorization?  Next steps &
>>          write-ups...
>>          -
>>
>>          RIB info model
>>          - Topology info model
>>
>> *
>>
>> More details on the proposed use-cases are below:
>>
>> *
>>
>>    1.
>>
>>    Use-Case Definitions:
>>    1.
>>
>>       RIB-based use-cases:
>>       1.
>>
>>          service chaining:  Directing traffic into MPLS out-segments,
>>          LSPs, or MPLS tunnels (pick right level of abstraction).  Directing 
>> traffic
>>          into other types of tunnels.
>>          2.
>>
>>          optimized exit scenario:  draft-white-i2rs-use-case-00.txt Sec 2
>>          3.
>>
>>          Distributed reaction to Network-based Attacks:
>>          draft-white-i2rs-use-case-00 Sec 3
>>          4.
>>
>>          Improving hub-and-spoke overlay routing:
>>          draft-white-i2rs-use-case-00  Sec 4
>>          5.
>>
>>          Optimized exit control: draft-white-i2rs-use-case-00 Sec 1
>>          6.
>>
>>          Brainstorm/discuss other use-cases
>>          2.
>>
>>       topology-based use-cases:
>>       1.
>>
>>          Services Provisioning:  Learning service points, connecting
>>          interfaces, abstracted topology
>>          2.
>>
>>          Standardized topology model: Path computation
>>          3.
>>
>>          Visibility of customer interfaces into standard topology:
>>          discuss use-cases
>>          4.
>>
>>          Visibility of peering interfaces into standard topology:
>>          discuss use-cases
>>          5.
>>
>>          Topology component history: failed links, interfaces that
>>          haven’t come up, etc...
>>          6.
>>
>>          Overlay topology: troubleshooting and monitoring:
>>          draft-amante-i2rs-topology-use-cases-00.txt Sec 4.1.3
>>          7.
>>
>>          Interactions with ALTO: discuss use-cases
>>          8.
>>
>>          Brainstorm/discuss other use-cases
>>          3.
>>
>>       BGP-based use-cases:
>>       1.
>>
>>          Centralized VPN Provisioning:
>>          draft-keyupate-i2rs-bgp-usecases-00.txt Sec 2.1
>>          2.
>>
>>          Centralized BGP Policy Updating:
>>          draft-keyupate-i2rs-bgp-usecases-00.txt Sec 2.2
>>          3.
>>
>>          BGP Error Handling: draft-keyupdate-i2rs-bgp-usecases-00.txt
>>          Sec 3.1
>>          4.
>>
>>          BGP Route Manipulation:
>>          draft-keyupdate-i2rs-bgp-usecases-00.txt Sec 4
>>          5.
>>
>>          BGP Troubleshooting: draft-keyupdate-i2rs-bgp-usescases-00.txt
>>          Sec 5
>>          6.
>>
>>          Brainstorm/discuss other use-cases
>>          2.
>>
>>    Taxonomy of network applications: centralized controller, focused
>>    service, always there, config & disappear, etc.
>>    3.
>>
>>    RIB info model: brainstorm initial data
>>    4.
>>
>>    Topology info model: brainstorm initial data
>>    5.
>>
>>    Communication transport options taxonomy:  TLS, UDP, TCP, SCTP, etc -
>>    pros and cons of each for secrecy, replay attacks, reliability, etc.
>>    6.
>>       1.
>>
>>       Authentication and authorization taxonomy:  What types of
>>       authentication and authorization are desirable?  Which can we reuse and
>>       what are their feature-sets?
>>
>>
>>    1.
>>
>>
>>    Thanks,
>>
>>    Alia
>>
>> *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> i2rs mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to