Subject: Re: [Anima] Self-Managed Networks

From: "Toerless Eckert (eckert)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 23:20:20 +0000

The visual picture i have:

autonomic agents, and OAM services can leverage:

A) messaging via grasp acp

Design goal for autonomic agents. Should also investigate where opportunity are in existing oam
Services to benefit

B) non messaging (eg :stream) via acp natively

Standard for existing oam. Not clear if/when new autonomic agents would need this (instead of a)

C) data plane
I think we may want to expand the way how we use grasp also across data plane:
if i want high throughput message exchange, grasp could automatically optimize them across data plane:

leveraging discovery and mutual trust learned/derived from acp. And fall back to acp when dp is broken.

With this design i would be able to hide the complex duality of acp/dp from autonomic agents.

Sent from my Samsung Captivate Glide on AT&T

Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]> wrote:
On 15/10/2015 21:57, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
> Toy, thanks for raising those questions. Obviously, we're not doing a good job yet in describing what the ACP is, and that needs to be fixed. And obviously, we all need the same view to progress further. So this is a very important discussion, and I really welcome it.
>
> Before formalising better text, let me see whether we get agreement on the fundamental idea.
>
> In my head, there are two layers: The ACP, and on top of that the Autonomic Functions:
>
> * The ACP is the "tool kit". It comprises various "mechanics", such as negotiation, synchronisation, discovery of various sorts, messaging, etc. Those are all based on a common addressing and naming concept.

Well, hold on. The ACP is the substrate for GRASP, but GRASP is defined so that in theory
it could run without the ACP (e.g. running over TLS). ACP+GRASP+etc = ANI (AN infrastructure).

>
> * Autonomic Functions use that tool kit to do something clever. In other words, the true autonomic "intelligence" sits on that level.
>
> There is *one* ACP, there are *many* autonomic functions on top.

Indeed, and fault management mechanisms are certainly important ones.

   Brian

>
> One way to decide to which layer something belongs is to ask: "is this (1) a generic functionality which many functions require, or is this (2) one specific function?". If the answer is (1), it belongs into the ACP, if (2) it belongs into an autonomic func