Daniel:
I just sent a note to the I2NSF Mail list. I think we are working on 2
different paradigms.
Sue: peer-wise negotiation [like BGP]
Daniel: something else?
Please send me the OASIS references if you get a chance.
Thanks, Sue
From: I2nsf
I believe - with my knowledge of netconf --what we are missing is the
ability to negotiate a proposal in an efficient way.
The closest we found so far is an oasis standard.
Happy to discuss it sunday!
Yours
Daniel
On Nov 10, 2016 08:55, "Susan Hares" wrote:
> Daniel:
>
>
>
>
Daniel,
You said:
“Our protocol defines how the two domains interconnect to have NSF working in
different domains interacting properly. In our case, the security controller of
the cloud and the security controller of the cloudlet agree on how the cloudlet
and the cloud needs to interconnect
Hi Susan,
I deeply apology for not having read carefully the
draft-hares-i2nsf-ddos-yang-dm-00, but my understanding is that our
protocol would – for example – end up in agreeing using inter-cloud-ddos
NSF with the inter-cloud-ddos NETCONF/YANG model. The remaining
configuration NETCONF/YANG will
Hi Linda,
I apology for the delay. Please find my response and additional questions –
mostly for Susan ;-). If you are find with the response, I can also send
them on the ML.
Q1: There is no difference between SSF and NSF. We will change that in the
next version. Thanks for raising it, this
Daniel and Alirezza,
Is the “Security Service Function (SSF)” in your draft equivalent to the
Network Security Function (NSF) defined in
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases-01.pdf ?
NSF: Network Security Function. An NSF is a function that detects abnormal