November 2011 - Nsi-wg - lists.ogf.org

NSI BOF tomorrow: 5:30 - 7:30 pm. Agenda!!!!
by Inder Monga 22 Dec '11

22 Dec '11

Hi All, We have been able to put an exciting agenda for the NSI BOF at Supercomputing. It is exciting to see seven interoperable software implementations - hear from the developers! The agenda is as follows: 5:30 - 5:45: Agenda and NSI Concepts introduction: Inder Monga 5:45 - 6:00: Automated GOLE Demonstrations with NSI: Jerry Sobieski 6:00 - 6:10: NSI Demonstration Live: Tomohiro Kudoh 6:10 - 6:20: CORONET and Need for Dynamic Networking: George Clapp 6:20 - 6:50: Panel with NSI Developers - Progress and Lessons Learnt Panelists: Henrik Jensen, Tomohiro Kudoh, Takahiro Miyamoto, Jeonghoon moon, Gerben van Malenstein, Evangelos Chaniotakis (more panelists still to be confirmed) The panel will consist of no slides but 1 minute summaries from all the panelists, followed by questions from the moderator and the audience. 6:50- 7:10: Topology Service - Looking forward: Jerry Sobieski and Jeroen Van de Ham (10 minutes each) 7:10 - 7:30: Open Mike for audience We look forward to your participation Thanks, Inder -- Inder Monga 510-486-6531 http://www.es.net Follow us on Twitter: ESnetUpdates/Twitter <http://bit.ly/bisCAd> Visit our blog: ESnetUpdates Blog <http://bit.ly/9lSTO3><http://bit.ly/d2Olql>

2 2

Issue 52 in ogf-nsi-project: time-out time - how to set timeouts
by ogf-nsi-project＠googlecode.com 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

Status: New Owner: guy.robe...(a)gmail.com Labels: Type-Review Priority-Medium FoundInVersion-1.0 FixedInVersion-1.1 New issue 52 by guy.robe...(a)gmail.com: time-out time - how to set timeouts http://code.google.com/p/ogf-nsi-project/issues/detail?id=52 Description of Issue: TK: how do we set time-outs? Discussion of Issue: JS: possible option is to add heart-beat message RHJ: does not recommend putting the onus on the user to determine time-out Henrik: no easy solution with current protocol design. Suggest that we could have policy on expected response times...? Jeroen: currently reservation requests can take around 1 minute and up to 2 minutes for provisioning. So we are often getting time-out issues in demo. JE: proposes using the existing query to check state. Radek: Need to add timer definition to the state machine to make this work Resolution of Issue: Some kind of exchange between RA and PA needed to find if PA is still processing request correctly. No clear resolution to this issue, needs further investigation

1 2

Issue 53 in ogf-nsi-project: confirmation messages for all state tranistions?
by ogf-nsi-project＠googlecode.com 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

Status: New Owner: ---- Labels: Type-Review Priority-Medium FoundInVersion-1.0 FixedInVersion-1.1 New issue 53 by guy.robe...(a)gmail.com: confirmation messages for all state tranistions? http://code.google.com/p/ogf-nsi-project/issues/detail?id=53 Description of Issue: Henrik: do we need a universal confirmation from PA to RA for all state transitions? Discussion of Issue: TK: could add a large burden of unnecessary messages? Resolution of Issue: The implications of the change needs to be reviewed.

1 3

Issue 48 in ogf-nsi-project: Addition of a Failed state into the state machine.
by ogf-nsi-project＠googlecode.com 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

Status: Accepted Owner: jmacau...(a)gmail.com Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium FoundInVersion-1.Rio FixedInVersion-1.1 New issue 48 by jmacau...(a)gmail.com: Addition of a Failed state into the state machine. http://code.google.com/p/ogf-nsi-project/issues/detail?id=48 Description of Issue: There is no way within the existing NSI state machine to determine if a reservation in the "Terminated" state reached that state through a successful execution or through a failure. Discussion of Issue: For example, a reservation is modelled by a state machine once a reserve.rq is sent and the state machine transitions from the "Initial" to the "Reserving" state. If the reserve.rq fails the existing state machine transitions into "Cleaning" and then to a final rest state of "Terminated". Likewise, a successfully executed schedule reaches the final rest state of "Terminated". An observer using the query operation would not be able to distinguish the failed schedule from the successful schedule after the fact. It can be even more confusing in that one schedule may have failed do to a second schedule, but there is no way to tell which after they have completed. There are two possible solutions: 1. Add a new "Failed" state to the state machine. 2. Add an informational field to the state machine / reservation record that tracks the reason for transition into the "Terminated" state. We could model a successful schedule that reached endTime. A manual terminate. A forcedEnd received from a child or local NRM. A reservation failure (could store the ServiceException). I do not believe the argument that this is an OAM issue and needs to be solved separately is valid in this case. We need additional information. Resolution of Issue: I would recommend option #2.

1 1

Issue 42 in ogf-nsi-project: Query details and summary
by ogf-nsi-project＠googlecode.com 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

Status: Accepted Owner: ---- Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium FoundInVersion-1.0 FixedInVersion-1.1 New issue 42 by thost...(a)gmail.com: Query details and summary http://code.google.com/p/ogf-nsi-project/issues/detail?id=42 I don't quite understand why we cannot just have one query mode, instead of the Summary and Details mode. Why not just have a single mode, which returns all the information? AFAICT none of the information requires a recursive query. Furthermore the current scheme actually prevents one from getting the current connection state and the list of children, which is rather unfortunate as that is exactly what I would like to have for the connection visualization tool. Is there any reason these two modes cannot be conslidated into one?

1 2

Minutes from today's NSI conf call
by Guy Roberts 04 Dec '11

04 Dec '11

Please find minutes of today's NSI conf call attached. _____________________________________________________________________ ** Guy Roberts, PhD Network Engineering & Planning * * Tel: +44 (0)1223 371300 * * City House Direct: +44 (0)1223 371316 * 126-130 Hills Road Fax: +44 (0)1223 371371 * Cambridge * CB2 1PQ E-mail: guy.roberts(a)dante.net<mailto:guy.roberts@dante.org.uk> D A N T E United Kingdom WWW: http://www.dante.net _____________________________________________________________________

2 1

NSI Interim Face-to-Face meeting
by Inder Monga 03 Dec '11

03 Dec '11

The demonstrations and progress on the protocol have been tremendous, thanks to your active participation. Now is the time to plan for the next steps, finish the standards specification, and tackle topology. In order to go over these detail oriented and/or contentious issues, we would like to organize a 3-day interim meeting where the NSI participants can get together and make focused progress. Please respond with your preferences below so we may choose the best possible week and location. If you have trouble viewing or submitting this form, you can fill it out online: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dHZXZ01STk1CLWYyQ0UxSV… NSI Interim Face-to-Face meeting Please click on your preferred week * * Feb 6 - 9th * Feb 13 - 17 (overlaps with APAN meeting in Thailand) * Feb 20 - 24th * Feb 27 - March 2nd (ON*VECTOR likely at San Diego) * Mar 5 - 8th (Overlaps with OFC/NFOEC in LAX) * March 9 - 15 (Combine with OGF meeting in Oxford Please add your preferred location * Which place can you travel to? * Japan * Berkeley * Washington D.C. * Cambridge * Some other location! Please enter your comments If none of the above work for you, please suggest alternatives. Powered by Google Docs <http://docs.google.com> Report Abuse <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/reportabuse?formkey=dHZXZ01STk1CLWYyQ0U…> - Terms of Service <http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS> - Additional Terms <http://www.google.com/google-d-s/terms.html>

2 2

Re: [Nsi-wg] NSI abstract at TNC'12
by Radek Krzywania 01 Dec '11

01 Dec '11

Hi all, In the attachment there is "final" version of the document, including all changes. We exceeded 1200 words limit by over 100 so I needed to cut some parts. The main change is the cut of the paragraphs on NSI agents (RA and PA), which did not bring much new to the abstract. I get down to 1199 :) I've already submitted this version just in case, but it is still possible to update it at any time before 5pm. So if anyone have some more comments - please speak now, or forever hold your peace. Again - authors please double check addresses and affiliations. And if someone has copies of two referenced documents, please check the references. Best regards Radek ________________________________________________________________________ Radoslaw Krzywania Network Research and Development Poznan Supercomputing and radek.krzywania(a)man.poznan.pl Networking Center +48 61 850 25 26 http://www.man.poznan.pl ________________________________________________________________________ > -----Original Message----- > From: Radek Krzywania [mailto:radek.krzywania@man.poznan.pl] > Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 1:14 PM > To: nsi-wg(a)ogf.org > Subject: NSI abstract at TNC'12 > > Hi all, > So far so good :) We have almost final version of the abstract (see > attachment). I cleaned the document from track changes, and put last edits > from Jerry and John. Since we have 9 authors by now, I've put a table with all > of them to fit on one page. I will mark we want to put a full paper (if TNC will > accept the abstract), which has chanced to be published then in some > recognizable media, so there will be even more work but more space to get > into every (well, most) aspect of the NSI in details. > Authors - please verify affiliations, I took addresses from web pages! > I am still missing the references - ogf is still migrating and I can't access > gridforge! Does anyone have copies of architecture and NSI CS specifications? > I would appreciated the title and authors list ASAP. > I am now closing alone in a room to the final overall reading. This is the last call > for changes! The submittion deadline is 5pm but TNC servers are quite heavy > utilised at that time and someone can fail to submit ;) so further changes may > not be uploaded for evaluation. > > Best regards > Radek > > ____________________________________________________________ > ____________ > Radoslaw Krzywania Network Research and Development > Poznan Supercomputing and > radek.krzywania(a)man.poznan.pl Networking Center > +48 61 850 25 26 http://www.man.poznan.pl > ____________________________________________________________ > ____________ >

1 1

Re: [Nsi-wg] Issue 30 in ogf-nsi-project: formalize NSI topology and relationship to inter-Network topology
by ogf-nsi-project＠googlecode.com 01 Dec '11

01 Dec '11

Updates: Owner: guy.robe...(a)gmail.com Comment #2 on issue 30 by guy.robe...(a)gmail.com: formalize NSI topology and relationship to inter-Network topology http://code.google.com/p/ogf-nsi-project/issues/detail?id=30 Assigned to GR to check that documentation reflects the topology used in the SC demo.

1 0

Re: [Nsi-wg] Issue 22 in ogf-nsi-project: Separate Query WSDL?
by ogf-nsi-project＠googlecode.com 01 Dec '11

01 Dec '11

Updates: Status: WontFix Comment #3 on issue 22 by guy.robe...(a)gmail.com: Separate Query WSDL? http://code.google.com/p/ogf-nsi-project/issues/detail?id=22 2 queries are still required

1 0