Hi Warren, Thanks for the review and comments. Please see my inline response.
Haoyu -----Original Message----- From: OPSAWG <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Warren Kumari Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2020 12:04 PM To: Tianran Zhou <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] extend the call//RE: WG adoption call for draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework-09 On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 1:14 AM Tianran Zhou <[email protected]> wrote: > > Working Group, > > > > Thank you for all of your emails related to draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework. > > It seems there are a lot of interested people. I hope the authors will be > encouraged by that. > > But there were also some strong concerns about the scope of the draft. What > is it trying to achieve? How does that match the charter? Does it include > material that is outside its scope? Thanks specially to Frank and Al for > saying their concerns. > > We are going to extend the adoption call for another two weeks to Jan 8. And > we encourage the inter-working group discussion. <no hats> I've just (re)read this, and have some concerns -- I found it somewhat hard to dig into the actual technical "meat" of the document (channeling Randy Bush "Where's the protein?") - it feels like it describes a bunch of benefits and features of a solution, but without actually describing the solution itself. The Abstract says that in the document "a high-level framework, In-situ Flow Information Telemetry (iFIT), is outlined.", but I couldn't really find it. Section 2 ("iFIT Framework Overview") is so very level that it doesn't really seem to say much at all. I assumed that I'd just missed a bunch of other documents which actually describe some of the details behind ifit, like what exactly an iFIT node *does*, or what exactly an "On-demand Flow Sketch" is[0]. Basically, if I wanted to implement this myself, how would I do so? [HS] I've added more details in the latest version but as I said, this draft is not a standard specification, so I just described the high level function modules and how they can be assembled to form a complete solution. I've talked with many people and they told me they had no difficulty to understand this and found many of the components are already common practices. For the flow sketch, we provided a reference in the draft but we didn't describe it extensively, because it's just used as an example in our discussion and interested readers should directly read the reference for more information. As for how to deploy such data structure, we actually consider this as a standard gap. We briefly discussed it in the gap analysis and will release several other drafts to cover those issues. The main thing I found was: https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww-ctc.huawei.com%2Fke%2Fpress-events%2Fnews%2F2019%2F6%2Ffirst-ifit-pilot-5g-transport-network-beijing-unicom-huawei&data=02%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cb89e7d80cf84400ac8d308d7921a9334%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637138515165652629&sdata=5MK%2BVY7QAyPZupkYMYLDijyLAqSxQhbG%2FUPVVq6mkTI%3D&reserved=0 "In October 2018, Huawei submitted the draft of iFIT — "In-situ Flow Information Telemetry Framework" — to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Huawei's iFIT is the industry's first in-band flow measurement solution to have been deployed commercially. In June 2019, Huawei's iFIT solution won the Best of Show Award Special Prize at Interop Tokyo 2019 — one of the most prestigious events in the industry." and "Huawei's innovative iFIT solution takes a hardware approach...", etc. This, and the general tone of the document, feels like a marketing driven exercise - the document describes a bunch of features and benefits of a solution, but without the detail needed to implement it. Without a full description of iFIT itself and a serious scrubbing of the marketing tone, I do not think that the document should be adopted. [HS] We write this draft from purely neutral and technical perspective. I don't know from where you sense the marketing tone. If so, please kindly point it out specifically so we can improve it. W [0]: "A flow sketch is a compact online data structure for approximate flow statistics which can be used to facilitate flow selection. The aforementioned CountMin Sketch is such an example. Since a sketch consumes data plane resources, it should only be deployed when needed." -- this doesn't really say anything. Where is the format for the datastructure defined? How do I write one, how do I deploy it?. [HS] The reference [CMSketch] Cormode, G. and S. Muthukrishnan, "An improved data stream summary: the count-min sketch and its applications", 2005, <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgor.2003.12.001> provides a good overview on sketch. In the next revision, I'll add some more description to help understand it. " iFIT Head Node: A special iFIT node. It is the entry node to an iFIT domain. Usually the instruction header encapsulation, if needed, happens here." - this just names something, but does not describe what it actually *is*, etc. [HS] If only read this one item, it might be confusing. The definition of this term depends on the definition of iFIT Node and iFIT domain, which depends on the definition of iFIT, iFIT application, and iFIT framework. </no hats> > > Please continue to discuss on the mailing list. > > > > Merry Christmas! > > Tianran > > > > From: OPSAWG [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tianran > Zhou > Sent: Monday, December 9, 2019 1:27 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [OPSAWG] WG adoption call for > draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework-09 > > > > Hi WG, > > > > On IETF 106 meeting, we saw predominant interest and support to this draft, > especially from operators. The authors then resolved all the open issues. > > As requested by the authors, this email starts a 2 weeks working group > adoption call for draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework-09. > > https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdata > tracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework%2F&data= > 02%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cb89e7d80cf84400ac8d308d7921a933 > 4%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637138515165652629& > sdata=aVDfz5wun4SlNiCw9An6I03P3OLk%2FnNhZ1t1w0WOLd8%3D&reserved=0 > > > > If you support adopting this document please say so, and please give an > indication of why you think it is important. Also please say if you will be > willing to review and help the draft. > > If you do not support adopting this document as a starting point to work on, > please say why. > > This poll will run until Dec 23.. > > > > Thanks, > > Tianran as co-chair > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > [email protected] > https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww. > ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopsawg&data=02%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%4 > 0futurewei.com%7Cb89e7d80cf84400ac8d308d7921a9334%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c > 753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637138515165652629&sdata=ufpb86jAbJmOmncs > HRNcmugluTUIsKIUF1JfFX%2Bu4cg%3D&reserved=0 -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopsawg&data=02%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cb89e7d80cf84400ac8d308d7921a9334%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637138515165662626&sdata=JNYRjj5yA87LHAAqI9qwns8kqXyXFc0BYQ%2FoSr9yF0Q%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
