Subject: Re: [I2nsf] can you comment on the I2NSF problem space?

From: "Toy, Mehmet" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 03:37:01 +0000

Linda,
A couple comments:
1.  In 3.4, "Today there is no standard interface to exchange security profiles
     between organizations."  Open Cloud Connect Architecture made an attempt to describe the interface and its associated attributes. Further work is being done by OCC Technical Committee.  You might reference the OCC Arch. Document.
 2.  In 4, "I2NSF Capability Layer
               - I2NSF Service Layer". 
Capability Layer sounds like OAM layer. Should you replace Capability Layer with OAM Layer?
3.    in 6.4, you can mention OCC. OCC TC is also working on SECaaS.
Hongwen might be able to point you a to a document that he is working on.

Thanks
Mehmet

-----Original Message-----
From: Linda Dunbar 
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 5:43 PM
To: [email-masked]'
Subject: updated I2NSF problem statement to reflect the narrower scoped charter

We updated the I2NSF problem statement to reflect the narrower scoped charter. 

The primary issues and challenges facing NSFs hosted by different domains are:

      3.1. Challenges Facing Security Service Providers..............5
         3.1.1. Diverse types of Security Functions..................5
         3.1.2. No Standard Characterization of NSFs.................6
         3.1.3. More Distributed NSFs and vNSFs......................7
         3.1.4. More Demand to Control NSFs Dynamically..............7
         3.1.5. Diverse Interfaces to Control and Monitor NSFs.......7
         3.1.6. Lack of mechanism to monitor the behavior of NSFs....8
      3.2. Challenges Facing Customers...............................8
         3.2.1. Need to integrate on-premises NSFs with Remote NSFs..8
         3.2.2. Today's Policy Expressions are Vendors Specific......9
         3.2.3. Difficulty to Monitor the Execution of Desired Policies
         ...........................................................10
      3.3. Difficulty to Validate Policies across Multiple Domains..10
      3.4. Lack of Standard Interface to Inject Feedback to NSF.....11

Your comments and suggestions are highly appreciated. 

Linda

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 5:37 PM
To: Mohamed Boucadair; Shaibal Chakrabarty; Linda Dunbar; Christian Jacquenet; Myo Zarny; Christian Jacquenet; Myo Zarny; Shaibal Chakrabarty; Linda Dunbar; Mohamed Boucadair
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-dunbar-i2nsf-problem-statement-04.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-dunbar-i2nsf-problem-statement-04.txt
has been successfully submitted by Linda Dunbar and posted to the IETF repository.

Name:		draft-dunbar-i2nsf-problem-statement
Revision:	04
Title:		Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF) Problem Statement
Document date:	2015-05-21
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		20
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dunbar-i2nsf-problem-statement-04.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dunbar-i2nsf-problem-statement/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dunbar-i2nsf-problem-statement-04
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-dunbar-i2nsf-problem-statement-04

Abstract:
   This document describes the motivation and the problem statement for
   Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF).

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat