Subject: [ANCP] Opoen Issues Minutes 67th IETF meeting; section "4.1 ANCP Functional Requirements"

From: "Haag, T" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 23:19:48 +0100

Sven, all,

Let me take the opportunity to point out a statement which was stated in
the minutes of the 67.IETF meeting.

"Thomas (T-Systems) - regarding reqs for elements need to be clear e.g.
what scalability requirements are (100s, or 1000s of nodes?).  Need to
consider this in the framework as to which environment the protocol
should be implemented in.  e.g. what works with 100s of nodes won't
necessarily work for a large network."

Following that remark I propose to update section "4.1 ANCP Functional
Requirements" in a way as shown below because it comes very close to
large scale (and already existing) architectures!

New text proposal:

"The ANCP protocol MUST allow fast-paced transactions, in the order to
provide real time transactions of a full populated Access Node to the
NAS.

The protocol MUST allow fast completion of a given operation, in the
order of magnitude of tens of milliseconds.  

In large scale networks Access Nodes are provisioned but not always
fully populated. Therefore the protocol MUST be scalable enough to allow
a given NAS to control thousands of Access Nodes (e.g. typical 5000 -
10000)."

Regards

Thomas

_______________________________________________
ANCP mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:47:41 +0100

Hi Thomas,

Agreed, we'll make the change using your text proposal.

Regards,
Sven

Haag, T wrote:
> “Thomas (T-Systems) - regarding reqs for elements need to be clear e.g. 
> necessarily work for a large network.”
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Following that remark I propose to update section “4.1 ANCP Functional 
> Requirements” in a way as shown below because it comes very close to 
> “The ANCP protocol MUST allow fast-paced transactions, in the order to 
> provide real time transactions of a full populated Access Node to the NAS.
> 
> 10000).”