September 2009 - Nsi-wg - lists.ogf.org

arch doc
by John Vollbrecht 16 Sep '09

16 Sep '09

I will put this in Google docs when I am able

1 0

google doc document
by Tomohiro Kudoh 16 Sep '09

16 Sep '09

I've shared a document with you: Context.Motivation.prose https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Ac4ZeyIu2P2YZGhrNHRtdjJfMTNjeHJueGRnYw&h… It's not an attachment -- it's stored online at Google Docs. To open this document, just click the link above.

1 0

Conversation about ITU concepts with Ciena folks
by John Vollbrecht 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

Jeroen van der Ham, Guy Roberts and myself had a conversation with Lyndon Ong, George Newsome and Rajender Razdan of Ciena about ITU networking recommendations. This was extremely helpful, and I thank the Ciena folks very much for their time and help. The following notes are put together by Jeroen and myself - please feel free to add or correct or question. We spend the first part of the meeting going over slides (see attachnment below) describing NSI concepts in G.800 terms. It is worth noting that George described the evolution of the recommendations as G.805 describing connection oriented networks, G. 809 attempting to extent that to connectionless networks, and then G. 800 which combines both. He also commented that the way that G.800 came to be is that "G.805 was observed to be insufficient for describing packet-switched networks (especially ethernet). Updating a standard is hard, hence a new standard." So using G.800 concepts is what is done in the slides and in discussions we have had earlier on the mailing list. G.8080 unfortunately still uses G.805 terminology, and adds some more - but is in the process of being updated/reviewed. G.8080 is also called ASON. On slide 2 it was remarked that it uses the term Subnet. This really is an abbreviation of Subnetwork, which is okay. It is probably better to use the full word subnetwork to distinguish it from IP subnets. On slide 3 and slide 6 we found that the ITU uses Link responder and Subnetwork responder as terms for the agents. On slide 5 we had a long discussion on terminology. There is a distinction between a Layer Network and a Routing Area, having to do with whether you could see the Link end or not (not completely sure?) In general George says that he thinks of them as basically the same. On slide 5 there was a discussion on the difference between a SNPP (subnetwork point pool) and a port. A SNPP is an ASON concept that is essentially the same as a link port except that a port might have multiple SNPPs. The SNPP is what is used for routing. The ASON concepts are named slightly differently than G.800. Link ports in 800 are Subnetwork ports (SNP) in 8080. George says that in casual conversation both are called ports. More on slide 5 Subnetwork is what the ITU calls it, but usually Network is used anyway when talking about it. NSI will likely switch to use the term Network for the concept that G.800 calls subnetwork. The distinction between Port and Point in G.800 is not helpful and for most intended purposes you can just use Port (for what G.800 calls a Point). The Forwarding Port seems to be fine. Forwarding point is where segments from different resources connect. In G.8080 Segment also seems okay, and is used in G.8080 for the same concept as it is used for in NSI - otherwise known as link connection and subnetwork connection in G.800. AccessPort is okay. Note that G.800 makes a clear distinction between a network connection which goes across a network, and a client connection which goes between clients (where clients connect to network). We also talked about document on multiple layers. The doc is attached The first figure in the doc seemed a normal way of describing a link on one layer being implemented on a different layer. George wanted to understand the second figure better - it shows that a network connection at one layer (ethernet layer) may include segments from another layer (SONET layer), and that there may be no link at the ethernet layer between the ethernet subnetworks. George said this was an interesting problem and that he had proposed the concept of transitional links to between ports at different layers to describe this concept. I am not sure I understand this completely, but I believe the idea is that doing this allows topology from both layers to be considered in pathfinding. This needs more thinking - at least on my part. George sent a number of documents that describe transitional links and other concepts. I am in the process of reading these still. There were some concepts indicating that GMPLS was not as good at describing multi-layer capabilities as G.800 (and possibly NML). I don't really understand precisely why. Thanks very much to all who participated.

6 17

context and motivation text
by John Vollbrecht 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

Attached is a prose version of Context and Motivation based on comments last week. Please comment . We can discuss Wed. John

1 0

Notes from call Wed Sept 9
by John Vollbrecht 11 Sep '09

11 Sep '09

We had a small group yesterday John V Tomohiro Jerry Sobieski Jeroen Discussion - We discussed the context and motivation doc I sent out to which attempts to include points from Guy and from Jerry/ Jeroen. Some comments - - There is confusion in doc (and in my head) about the difference between a network and a network service. I have calleded what is actually a network a network service, and this needs to be fixed. - cleaning up an understaning of Network, network service, network service agent and network service interface is needed - difference in emerging networks between R&E, Commercial provider and home user is in the doc but needs to be reworked. - we discussed how new paradigm draws from technology in both IP and telecom. It is suggested that this does not belon g in context part of doc. - we discussed relationship to NML group - particularly the role o NML in defining Global naming for network instances. - we agreed that a network is the atomic element in a multi-network environnment. There was a lot of discussion about this - one implication is that the NSI interface does not deal with how a network makes something happen. The NSI interface is only for providing services by the network as as whole. I will modify the context and motivation and send it out to the group in the next couple days. We also discussed the document outline I sent. We decided that an overview section needed to be inserted between the Context and Data-Plane overview sections. This section would explain the overall architecture. We will use the ESNet doc as input for some of this. I will attempt to put this as well as draft sections on Google Docs in the next few days. -- John

1 0

draft outline of arch doc
by John Vollbrecht 09 Sep '09

09 Sep '09

2 1

draft outline for architecture NSI doc
by John Vollbrecht 09 Sep '09

09 Sep '09

1 0

NSI context and motivation
by John Vollbrecht 09 Sep '09

09 Sep '09

Attached is a motivation and context draft - I have attempted to include most of what Guy and Jerry/Jeroen sent in a different organization. I am sure it needs more work - I would like comments on whether it is worth refining. John

1 1

Daisy chain
by Tomohiro Kudoh 03 Sep '09

03 Sep '09

Hi all, Attached slide shows my view of daisy chain, and meanings of arrows. Tomohiro

1 1

call info for interim call Thurs 10ET
by John Vollbrecht 03 Sep '09

03 Sep '09

jrv(a)internet2.edu has invited you to a conference call. Starting Time: Sep 3, 2009 at 10:00 AM, US/Eastern Duration: 2:00 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: 0191528

1 0