Subject: Re: [Supa] minutes of the 5/26 SUPA call

From: "Jun Bi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 12:28:16 +0800

Hi John,

The current charter explains what SUPA want to do and what are the possible
deliverables. I have questions as below:

1.      The first paragraph talks about two mechanisms which lead to an
information model in the second paragraph. However, it might be not easy to
understand for those are not familiar with SUPA or even SDN and YANG models
that why these two requirements lead to an information model.

2.      There are five working items and the first three are all information
models from the same draft, for now. IMHO, is it suitable to combine these
three into one working item? One draft as three individual working items may
cause confusion to those who did not follow the progress of SUPA recently. 

Thank you.

Jun Bi

发件人: Supa [mailto:[email-masked]] 代表 Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
发送时间: 2015年5月27日 14:56
收件人: [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> 
主题: [Supa] minutes of the 5/26 SUPA call

Hi, 

Please find below the meeting notes from the SUPA call on 5/26. Please let
me know if anything important is missing, or I caught it wrongly. 

Thanks and Regards,

Dan

-------------------------------- 

Initial agenda: 

1. Note Well, logistics, agenda bashing (chairs, 0 min)

2. Updated charter (Juergen/John, 20 min)

3. How does the framework improve and simplify existing work – for example
in routing, or ACLs. (John/Juergen, 20 min)

4. Steering (Benoit, 20 min)

2. Tina and Dan reported on discussions with Benoit during the last week.
Benoit feels now more comfortable with the scope of work, but his opinion is
that the charter is still hard to read for somebody not familiar with the
previous discussions, and the scope of work does not appear evident from the
charter. His advice is that the team works to simplify the charter text and
include some of the discussions related to ‘critical questions’ in order
to make the scope and deliverables appear clear in a manner simple to
understand for people not familiar with the work, and also explain relations
with other WGs work as well as how other WGs will relate and use this work. 

Benoit also advised to create a wiki where the principal discussions can be
documented in a Q&A format. 

Benoit delegated the co-chairs of the BOF to go ahead and submit a request
for a WG-forming BOF in the wiki if they feel comfortable that the team made
enough progress in focusing the scope and deliverables and writing a more
clear charter. 

John and Juergen will make another pass on the charter text, provide new
improved version to be included in the BOF request. 

Giorgios and the other authors will work to update the problem statement I-D
until the end of the next week, so that an update version can be ready
together with the other materials to support the BOF request. 

3. John shared notes from reading and reviewing the DiffServ Policy I-D form
NETMOD. It contains very little policy stuff, the way SUPA approaches
policy. Dan asked what would be different if the SUPA work already existed.
John replied that the Information Model would provide the basic constructs
and objects for defining policies, and this would allow for the DiffServ
model to be smaller and more consistent, avoid duplication and definition of
many non-reusable objects.   Dan observed that this could be a good example
of Q&A to be included in the wiki page. 

John suggested that some of the policy data modelling work done in other WGs
could be moved to SUPA. Dan responded that this does not seem to be
realistic, as other WGs are already chartered and work is ongoing, with
their own schedules. Sue agreed and observed that the data models work in
the routing area is proceeding and cannot wait for SUPA to define the
generic model. The BGP data model is cornerstone for work done by all other
modeling efforts in I2RS, IVR, TESS. Mid-June is the milestone for providing
significant input. SUPA should proceed as fast as it can with the abstract
framework, but it would be a concurrent effort at best that needs
collaboration and synchronization.  

4. Benoit could not attend the call, but we discussed his comments and
advice to Tina and Dan. 

Tina entered a request for a wiki page. Dan suggested to make it accessible
to all participants in the SUPA work and in the IETF, so that it can become
an interactive page for sharing information. Sue agrees and suggested that
separate sections or children pages can be dedicated to specific policy work
in other WGs. Dan is fine with the proposal, and encourages other WG
participants to ask questions and contribute with material. Sue will
distribute information about the wiki as soon as it becomes available. Dan
will write some of the initial content based on the responses to the
‘critical questions’. 

John, Max and Sue will work on the review of the policy models from I2RS.
Will be presented in the call next Monday. 

Juergen observed that there is need to consolidate some of the information
and content of the current I-Ds. Dan pointed to the documents related to the
distributed data center use case. These need consolidation, as we need to
decide soon whether they stay in the deliverables list (currently #5). Right
now the focus is on #1, #2, #3.