Subject: [DMM] FYI - FPC Working sessions

From: "Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:56:40 +0000

All,

Apologies for sending out tomorrow's meeting directly.  Enclosed is an invite for daily FPC working sessions (Wednesday through Friday).  We'll focus on policy and keep iterating as we progress.

Lyle

________________________________

This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.

Subject: FPC Working Session
From: "Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]" <[email-masked]>
To: Charlie Perkins <[email-masked]>, Satoru Matsushima <[email-masked]>, Marco Liebsch <[email-masked]>, "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <[email-masked]>, "Moses, Danny" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:54:17 +0000

1 hour.

We'll try to complete policy.  I'll set up a few use cases as well.  We'll only focus on policy aspects of the context.

Proposed Use Case(s) (all assume DPN Selection has occurred)

3 policies are proposed
1.	Account for and DROP all port 22 destined to the mobile.
2.	Set the AMBR for all traffic from 10.5.5.0 to 3Mbps.
3.	For (UE on port 318 and 10.6.5.5 port 9335) account on bucket X, set traffic-class to Y, set max bit rate to 2Mbps.

Part 1 - Basic Policy Management
1.	Create a Descriptor.
2.	Create an Action.
3.	Create a Rule.
4.	Create a Policy.

Part 2 - Mobility Policy Management (single context).
5.	Create a Mobility Context with a pre-configured policy.
6.	Create a Mobility Context with a dynamic policy.
7.	Change the DPN assigned in the SGW / MAG role (mobile moves), aka handover in a 
a.	make before break model.
b.	break before make.

Part 3 - Secondary context (bearers)
8.	Add a secondary context
9.	Secondary context update based upon 7a and 7b.
10.	Remove a secondary context

.........................................................................................................................................
--> Join Skype Meeting <https://meet.ad.sprint.com/lyle.t.bertz/305GZ9T8>       
Trouble Joining? Try Skype Web App <https://meet.ad.sprint.com/lyle.t.bertz/305GZ9T8?sl=1>  
Join by phone
913-315-1921 <tel:913-315-1921>  (US) 		English (United States) 
913-553-3030 <tel:913-553-3030>  (US) 		English (United States)  
Find a local number <https://dialin.ad.sprint.com>  

Conference ID: 3895350
 Forgot your dial-in PIN? <https://dialin.ad.sprint.com>  |Help <https://o15.officeredir.microsoft.com/r/rlidLync15?clid=1033&p1=5&p2=2009>      

Please see the   find a local number   link above for toll free numbers 
[!OC([1033])!]
.........................................................................................................................................

---

From: Charlie Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 19:47:49 -0800

Hello Lyle,

I'm not sure I fully understand the scenarios that you have suggested.  
Please let me know if my understandings are correct, as I interpolate 
assertions and questions within the example text.

> We’ll try to complete policy. I’ll set up a few use cases as well. 
> We’ll only focus on policy aspects of the context.

Here, I reckon "context" means "mobility context".

> Proposed Use Case(s) (all assume DPN Selection has occurred)

I understand this to mean that various policies have been supplied to 
the FPC Agents that are operating the DPNs involved with dataplane 
service for the mobile node.  I guess we are dealing with a single 
mobile node -- is that correct?

> 3. For (UE on port 318 and 10.6.5.5 port 9335) account on bucket X, 
> set traffic-class to Y, set max bit rate to 2Mbps.

Are these three policies for all mobile nodes (even though we may only 
be dealing with one)?

The term bucket does not appear in the FPC draft document, and traffic 
class seems to have something to do with ranges of IP addresses.

Are we distinguishing between AMBR and max bit rate?  Is AMBR intended 
to be for all mobile nodes, or for all flows of a particular mobile node?

> Part 1 – Basic Policy Management
>
> 1. Create a Descriptor.
>
> 2. Create an Action.
>
> 3. Create a Rule.
>
> 4. Create a Policy.

Since we have three policies, I guess that these four items are each 
replicated at least three times, with likely more for the Descriptors.  
Performing the four items for Policy #1 might be pretty easy, but the 
other two policies could bring up more subtle points.  Anyway this will 
be a very good exercise.

Any policy that puts a cap on aggregate bit rate from ALL mobile nodes 
in the entire domain is going to require some protocol. Putting a cap on 
the aggregate bit rates from all mobile nodes at a single DPN seems a 
lot more manageable.

> Part 2 – Mobility Policy Management (single context).
>

In (5) -- does this mean picking one of the three policies and creating 
a Mobility Context?  If we have it so that a Mobility Context is 
associated with a mobile node (my very fond hope), then does the 
preconfigured policy get to be installed at network entry?  Or maybe 
there is a sort of "generalized" Mobility Context that has Settings that 
are configured for a particular mobile node at network entry, and 
modified as needed as the mobile node moves and creates new flows and 
finishes old flows and so on.

Is a Dynamic Policy something that changes as the mobile node moves around?

For (7), presumably the Context Transfer will be very similar, but the 
handover protocol will be different.  Of course I would like it, if FPC 
had something to say about handover protocol.  I did not see anything 
about that yet in the document, but since the term MAG appears, I guess 
we are to assume PMIP.  For the purposes of this discussion, it might be 
nice to have something similar to Figure 16, but redrawn in PowerPoint 
for clarity.

As drawn in Figure 16, let's say that FPC Client lives in the control 
plane on a node called the "LMA Controller (LMA-C)" and makes run-time 
decisions.  Is that your intention?

> Part 3 – Secondary context (bearers)
>

The term "Secondary context" does not appear in the FPC draft document.  
But a bearer has some resemblance to a flow.  So maybe you mean that the 
identity of the mobile node establishes a primary context, and flow 
creation establishes a secondary context.  Is that correct?  If so, then 
there should not be much difference between 7a and 7b (I hope!).

Regards,
Charlie P.