As we all know, the I2RS making list is a great place for having more
substantive discussion.

Alia
On Feb 28, 2014 5:57 PM, "t.petch" <[email protected]> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Susan Hares" <[email protected]>
> To: "'t.petch'" <[email protected]>; "'Jeffrey Haas'" <[email protected]>
> Cc: <[email protected]>; "'Edward Crabbe'" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 4:16 PM
>
> > Jeff:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I am presenting these following of these as a group for my co-authors:
> >
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hares-i2rs-use-case-vn-vc/
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huang-i2rs-mpls-te-usecases/
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-i2rs-mpls-ldp-usecases/
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ji-i2rs-usecases-ccne-service/
> > (centralized controller)
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-i2rs-ts-use-case/
> > (traffic steering)
> >
> > This grouping provides a general framework  service layer routing
> > improvements to hub-and-spoke the i2rs charter requests based on a
> virtual
> > networks/virtual connections (draft-hares-i2rs-use-case-vn-vc),
> utilizing a
> > centralized controller (draft-i2rs-usecases-ccne-service), mpls-te
> links
> > (draft-huang-i2rs-mpls-te-usecases),  mpls ldp
> > (draft-chen-i2rs-mpls-ldp-usecases), and traffic
> > Steering (draft-chen-i2rs-ts-use-case).  My co-authors and I seek
> feedback
> > on these use cases.
>
> Sue
>
> Yes, you have 10 minutes of time allocated two hours into a two and a
> half hour session; good luck:-)
>
> Tom Petch
> >
> > My co-authors and I would love to chat about the mobile backhaul use
> case:
> >
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhang-i2rs-mbb-usecases/
> >
> > but since it is not specifically on the charter, I suspect you and Ed
> will
> > need to rule if can be discussed on the list.  If it is not, please
> let me
> > know.
> >
> > It is important to get the use cases for these deployments down so we
> can
> > adequately discuss the information models.
> >
> > Sue Hares
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of t.petch
> > Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 10:18 AM
> > To: Jeffrey Haas
> > Cc: [email protected]; Edward Crabbe
> > Subject: Re: [i2rs] IETF 89 agenda published
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jeffrey Haas" <[email protected]>
> > To: "t.petch" <[email protected]>
> > Cc: "Edward Crabbe" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 4:32 PM
> > > Tom,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 02:20:17PM +0000, t.petch wrote:
> > > > It seems a shame that use cases comes last, since, as Alia said
> > > > recently,
> > > >
> > > > "If you were to look at our charter, unsurprisingly we have
> > use-cases to
> > > > be
> > > > completed before information models.  I would strongly encourage
> > > > discussion of the use-case drafts and serious work on turning them
> > > > into
> > something
> > > > that
> > > > the working group could accept."
> > > >
> > > > My own take is to wait for use cases to progress before taking a
> > serious
> > > > interest in, e.g., architecture and info model.
> > >
> > > As I've been coming up to speed on the documents in the work group
> and
> > the
> > > mail archives, the use cases vary from very well discussed to very
> > light
> > > discussion.  The ones that have received good discussion also tend
> to
> > have
> > > related info model documents.
> > >
> > > Since I've been digesting the use case documents in bulk, it's
> pretty
> > clear
> > > that a number of common requirements can be extracted from them.
> > Thus,
> > > where the documents appear to be in terms of maturity is some need
> of
> > > editing and refinement to attempt to make those common requirements
> > > explicitly visible across the document set.  Much of that work is
> for
> > the
> > > mailing list.  Some of the use cases are a bit more novel in terms
> of
> > the
> > > likely fallout of their requirements and deserve more group
> > discussion.
> > >
> > > In terms of simply keeping the WG pipeline full, it's definitely
> time
> > to
> > > start spending some cycles on data model language and protocol.
> While
> > it's
> > > certainly possible that as the use case documents are refined that
> > they'll
> > > reveal additional requirements, my hope is that they're not
> disruptive
> > > discoveries.  Clearly it's a finish-to-finish dependency
> relationship.
> > >
> > > Meanwhile, I'm sure the use case authors would appreciate as much
> help
> > as we
> > > can give them to drive the documents to completion. :-)
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > I find the use case documents a very mixed bag.
> >
> > I note that the rib info model cites the white and hares use case
> I-Ds,
> > which suggests to me that they should be adopted by the WG (or else
> > dropped:-(
> >
> > I note that the mbb usecases, which I find the most persuasive,
> regards the
> > info model as inadequate, which, again, says to me this should either
> be a
> > WG document, or else declared out of scope for the info model at this
> time.
> >
> > Discussions last year seemed to stall at times over what the use cases
> > should be and I would find it hard to know whether or not the info
> model was
> > adequate without knowing what the use cases were.  So I think that the
> WG
> > needs a view on which of the many use case I-Ds is relevant to the
> current
> > work.
> >
> > I find the protocol issues less pressing, perhaps because the IETF has
> been
> > round that block so many times before.  The genesis of e.g. PCEP
> seemed a
> > relatively straghtforward birth, compared to, say, the data modelling
> work
> > of e.g. netmod or, delving into the past, SMI.
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> > > -- Jeff (not currenty speaking as a chair, just someone who's done
> > some
> > > amount of project management)
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > i2rs mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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