July 2012 - nml-wg - lists.ogf.org

Re: [Nml-wg] NML feedback
by Freek Dijkstra 13 Jul '12

13 Jul '12

[Please post counter proposals also to https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6495] I have recently distributed some NML example topologies to people outside of the NML developers. This included label definitions like: <nml:label> <nml:parameter name="type">http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet/vlan</nml:parameter> <nml:parameter name="values">1780-1783</nml:parameter> </nml:label> Some of the feedback was that the label syntax was too verbose, and the alternative was akin to the original proposal: <nml:label labelType="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet/vlan">1780-1783</nml:label> This in combination with a recent majority on the NML mailing list who favoured a relative flat syntax for label ranges ("1780-1783" instead of <start>1780</start><end>1783</end>) has prompted me to see if a more simple alternative is possible. To that end, I posed two complex label definitions, to see how those can be described: 1. IP does not describe resource labels, but a source + destination label pair. How to describe a label pair with "source IP 145.100.124.38 and destination IP 193.10.252.66"? 2. WDM channel not only have a (central) frequency (or central wavelength) but also a given frequency bandwidth, the spacing. How to specify the these (ITU-gridless) wavelengths: "The wavelengths with 193.0, 193.1 and 193.2 central frequency with 100 GHz spacing, and another wavelength at 193.275 central frequency with 50 GHz spacing". After some thinking, here is a proposal: (sorry for the quoting, this prevents wrapping in my mail client) > 1. <nml:label labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ip/ipv4"><source>145.100.124.38</source><destination>193.10.252.66</destination></nml:label> > > 2. <nml:labelgroup labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/dwdm/frequency">193.0-193.2±0.05,193.275±0.025</nml:label> > (or the alternative if we don't want a non-ASCII "±" sign, and like to see the spacing rather than half the spacing): > <nml:labelgroup labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/dwdm/frequency">193.0-193.2~0.1,193.275~0.05</nml:label> In conclusion, I think that the shorter variant can be done, as long as we specify per labeltype what the syntax is. I recommend to distinguish between nml:label and nml:labelgroup, now that the type="value"/type="values" is no longer there to distinguish between a label and a label group. Regards, Freek

3 5

NML Relations 1: formal definition
by Freek Dijkstra 12 Jul '12

12 Jul '12

Hi all, Currently, an NML Relation is defined as a relation between Network Objects. This is a problem for relations between non-Network Objects, like the "locatedAt" relation which related a Network Object to a Location. However, Location is not a subclass of Network Object. Hence, this relation is formally invalid. Another example is in RDF, where the "next" relation is used between List Items, which are not Network Objects. We can solve this three ways: 1) Make every a subclass of a Network Object 2) Remove the restriction that a NML Relation must be between Network Objects. 3) Make a distinction between NML Relation and other type of Relations. For simplicity sake, I propose solution (2). A NML Relation (if we still like to define such beast) would be "any relation that is defined by the NML specs" rather than "any relation between two NML Network Objects". Freek

2 1

Registration at redmine
by Freek Dijkstra 11 Jul '12

11 Jul '12

All, OGF is moving from GridForge to Redmine for project management. For now, please keep using GridForge as-is However, to ease the transition later, it would be useful if you already register yourself at https://redmine.ogf.org/account/register In particular, I like to make sure that Martin, Jason, Jeroen, and Roman have full access rights. Could you let me know your username/id off-list? (Jason, I already have yours) While you can use OpenID to log in, it seems that the svn/git repository module requires you to (also?) set a password in the Redmine system (I guess that kind of defeats the idea of OpenID...). Freek

1 0

Conference call Thu July 12
by Freek Dijkstra 11 Jul '12

11 Jul '12

Hi all, We have a call today at the usual time and place: UTC 15:00 - CEST 17:00 - Eastern 11:00 - Pacific 8:00 Call: +1-734-615-7474 (Please use if you do not pay for Long Distance) or +1-866-411-0013 (toll free US/Canada Only) Enter access code: 0186145 Agenda: - Document update - label syntax: do we want to change Roman's proposal based on NSI feedback? https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6495 - List of open artifacts (I hope to update the list today or tomorrow) Roman, do you like to discuss your recent contributions? Due to other appointments, the call will take one hour max (but hopefully it's shorter than that). Freek

2 2

New schema
by Freek Dijkstra 09 Jul '12

09 Jul '12

I've just updated the schema to include PortGroups and LinkGroups and list all relations that Jeroen recently send out to the list. https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/doc15481 Note that per UML standards, all abstract classes are now in italics. The source document can be found in the Subversion repository. I also added a schema that detailed the Relations as opposed to the class hierarchy. https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-base/sources/NML-schema.graffle https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-base/NML-schema.pdf https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-base/NML-relations.pdf Feedback is most appreciated (did I forget something, are there any errors or omissions?) Regards, Freek

1 1

URNs with query part
by Freek Dijkstra 09 Jul '12

09 Jul '12

Let me forward this to the NML-WG. Jeroen originally brought up the query part, and I commented on it off-list (in-person even). Jeroen is currently on holiday, but can probably comment when he returns. (I removed some spurious quotations for readability). Freek -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Nsi-wg] Syntax of NML endpoints in a connection request (was: Determining the Network of an STP) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 09:36:28 -0400 From: Aaron Brown <aaron(a)internet2.edu> To: Freek Dijkstra <Freek.Dijkstra(a)sara.nl> CC: John MacAuley <john.macauley(a)surfnet.nl>, NSI WG <nsi-wg(a)ogf.org> On Jul 6, 2012, at 7:14 AM, Freek Dijkstra wrote: [...] >> <source>urn:ogf:network:nordu.net:2012:onsala-tx?vlan=1791</source> >> <sink>urn:ogf:network:nordu.net:2012:onsala-rx?vlan=1791</sink> [...] The query stuff may have just been shorthand, but in case it's not, overloading the URN to include a query parameter seems a bad idea to me. I'd rather see something like (all in short-hand): <source> <port> <port_group idRef="urn:ogf:network:sne.science.uva.nl:2012:lighthouse-egress" /> <vlan>1791</vlan> </port> </source> For the "connect any vlan", you could presumably leave the vlan parameter out: <source> <port> <port_group idRef="urn:ogf:network:sne.science.uva.nl:2012:lighthouse-egress" /> </port> </source> You could presumably override the set of 'any' VLANs by doing something like: <source> <port> <port_group idRef="urn:ogf:network:sne.science.uva.nl:2012:lighthouse-egress"> <vlans>1790-1800</vlans> </port_group> </port> </source> I'm not positive what the "connect ALL vlans" would look like because I'm not sure what the result of that operation would be. i.e. would it be a port with multiple VLANs, or would it be a PortGroup that functions as a port, or would it be a ridiculous number of ports (depending on how many VLANs are in the PortGroup)? Cheers, Aaron

1 1

CFP: NetCloud2012 - The 2nd workshop on Network Infrastructure Services as part of Cloud Computing (3-6 December 2012, Taipei, Taiwan)
by Yuri Demchenko 09 Jul '12

09 Jul '12

Apologies for cross-posting. This is a good chance to expose our work to the AP region. The CloudCom2012 conference (http://2012.cloudcom.org/) features a number of workshop with majority of regional participants. ----------- CFP NetCloud2012 -------------- The 2nd workshop on Network Infrastructure Services as part of Cloud Computing (NetCloud 2012) In conjunction with the 4th IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science (CloudCom2012) http://2012.cloudcom.org 3-6 December 2012, Taipei, Taiwan Introduction The workshop is a follow-up of the first successful workshop in 2011, where a number of enthusiasts of cloud computing and future networking exchanged ideas and presented results of research projects dealing with clouds and network integration. The Cloud computing emerges as a new computing paradigm which aims to provide secure and reliable, on demand QoS guaranteed computing environments for the end-users. Cloud computing services usage in both academia and industry, changed the way of thinking on how users’ needs can be satisfied by computational infrastructures. However, with the increase of data transferred among different places, it became critical how to support distributed computing resources with advanced network infrastructure services. It is envisioned that network infrastructure services provisioned on-demand could be managed and reconfigured dynamically by Cloud operators and user applications to achieve optimal usage criteria. Such dynamic infrastructures reveal new aspects in network virtualisation, service delivery automation and general infrastructure resources management that should be supported by well-defined information models and related middleware. New components of the required network infrastructure for Cloud services and applications should create an integrated self-management environment that can react to changes in workloads and other events with minimal human interference. Security issues should addressed as a part of the general service delivery framework/workflow and support both infrastructure provisioning process and secure virtualised services/infrastructures operation. The workshop will address issues of network virtualisation to create an ecosystem for cloud computing applications. In particular, the workshop will discuss the progress of development of advanced tools and mechanisms for seamless and efficient integration of network and IT worlds, not well interconnected so far. The workshop will consist of a number of sessions, where recent results of on-going and just-finished research projects will be demonstrated. The workshop will present also some future research considerations on the future of cloud computing and networking and expose views from different perspectives: research projects and industry. The workshop will be followed by a panel discussion, to allow free exchange of thoughts and ideas between the workshop speakers and audience. Objectives NetCloud 2012, collocated with IEEE CloudCom 2012, attempts to address the problem of how the underlying network infrastructure is capable of supporting advanced cloud computing cases. The workshop is intended to bring together network research community, commercial network operators and industry with the major cloud computing players, including IT specialists, researchers and commercial providers. Topics of Interest * Definition and architectures for the Network as a Service (NaaS) cloud service model and Cloud Carrier operational model * Heterogeneous network architectures and frameworks for distributed and high performance computing * Cloud and Intercloud architecture frameworks and required on-demand network infrastructure provisioning * Unified and converged IT and optical resources description languages and frameworks for cloud oriented infrastructures * General Infrastructure services provisioning in clouds, new architecture developments, service delivery and on-demand provisioning frameworks * Isolation and flexibility of the cloud oriented virtualised optical networks * Network infrastructure optimization for intra- and inter- datacenter communication and resources virtualisation * Standardization of optical network service provisioning interfaces for cloud based platforms and services * Co-advertisement, co-planning, composition and co-provisioning of any type of optical network resource and IT services (i.e. connectivity + IT resources at the end-points coordinated in a single, optimal procedure) * Performance and reliability issues, Service Level Agreement and QoS guarantees in the network layer * Dynamically provisioned security infrastructure and its integration with provider and customer legacy services and service provisioning workflow, security policy definition, security context management * End-to-end techniques for autonomic management of cloud resources * Policy based infrastructure services management * Experimental platforms that support network management in cloud computing * Experimentation test-beds and measurement studies Call for papers: Papers describing original research on both theoretical and practical aspects of dynamic network services for cloud computing are solicited. Important Dates: Paper Submissions: August 10, 2012 Notification: September 7, 2012 Camera-ready: September 28, 2012 Paper submission instructions This workshop will only accept for review original papers that have not been previously published. Papers should be formatted based on the IEEE Transactions journals and conferences style; maximum allowed camera-ready paper length is six (6) pages. Submissions must be in Adobe PDF format, including text, figures and references. Accepted papers will be published in the CloudCom2012 proceedings, for further information see IEEE CloudCom 2012 web page http://2012.cloudcom.org/. Review procedure All submitted paper will be reviewed by international program committee. Workshop Organizers The workshop is organized by the partners of the GEYSERS, the EC-funded FP7 project. Bartosz Belter, Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Center, Poland bartosz.belter (at) man.poznan.pl Yuri Demchenko, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands, y.demchenko (at) uva.nl Technical Program Committee (tentative list) 1. Ilias Baldine (RENCI, US) 2. John Baras (Maryland, US) 3. Thomas Michael Bohnert (ZTH, Switzerland) 4. David O'Callaghan (TCD, Ireland) 5. Graca Carvalho (Cisco, The Netherlands) 6. Nicola Ciulli (Nextworks, Italy) 7. Pasquale Donadio (Alcatel-Lucent Italy, Italy) 8. Joan Antoni Garcia Espin (i2CAT, Spain) 9. Jeroen van der Ham (UvA, Netherlands) 10. Athanasios Liakopoulos (GRnet, Greece) 11. Max Ott (NICTA, Australia) 12. Symeon Papavassiliou (NTUA, Greece) 13. Anna Tzanakaki (AIT, Greece)

1 0

Extensibility
by Freek Dijkstra 06 Jul '12

06 Jul '12

At the call earlier today we shortly discussed how to deal with future extensibility of NML. Let me give two practical examples: 1) Topologies may change over time, and the "version" attributed is used as a serial number to distinguish between updates in the Topology description (akin to the serial number in DNS SOA records). Currently this version attribute is only allowed for Topologies; allowing it for each network object may complicate change management more than needed. However, we can envision a situation where a future NML version would allow this use. 2) the "hasTopology" relation is only allowed between two Topologies, but perhaps in the future NMLv2 allow it from a Service to a Topology. We hope that the following will work: * The schema (UML schema, RDF schema and XML schema) will be "loose": they will liberally allow all sorts of extensions. In the above examples, the version attribute can be part of all Network Objects, and hasTopology may relate any Network Object to a Topology. * In the text, we will add further restrictions about the behaviour of NML version 1 compliant agents. In the above examples, a NMLv1 generator SHOULD NOT add version attributes to non-Topology network objects; a NMLv1 parser SHOULD ignore version attributes for non-Topology network objects; the meaning of the "hasTopology" relation between a Service and a Topology is undefined, and SHOULD be ignored by NMLv1 parsers. * Specific application may pose further restrictions on the NML descriptions that are generated and parsed. For example, NSI may impose restrictions how a STP is described in NML. Is this a useful way forward that both allows extensibility, without allowing too many variations (and thus interoperability) of NML? Regards, Freek

2 2

New schema in the repository
by Jeroen van der Ham 05 Jul '12

05 Jul '12

Hi, Freek and I went through the scheme section and did a complete overhaul bringing it in line with the current scheme diagram. The relation definitions are not finished yet. Please have a look through it and suggest improvements where necessary. Regards, Jeroen.

1 0