Subject: [icnrg] Review and update of draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines

From: "Rahman, Akbar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 17:53:55 +0000

Hi Prakash & Chairs,

We have updated our draft to address the comments from Prakish and some of his other colleagues at Cisco (who gave us some more off-line comments):

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-04

Here is the specific list of changes we made:

1.      Clarified that ICN can be run on many types of networks (access, transport, edge processing, CDN, core, data center, etc.) though in the main discussion text we just stuck to access network, core network and CDNs for simplicity

2.      Changed “wholesale replacement” to the more commonly used “clean-slate”, and clarified that it involves changes to existing applications, protocol stacks, etc. in addition to changes to IP routing

3.      Clarified interaction between normal IP routing running in the Internet and ICN based routing in (1) ICN-as-an-Overlay, and (2) ICN-as-an-Underlay

4.      Added references to ONAP.org which does MANO support for ICN-as-a-Slice

5.      Added more details about Cisco’s Hybrid-ICN approach, including reference to their open source Cicn project, and expected trials

6.      Clarified the main stakeholders in ICN deployments (included adding end device manufacturer and user)

7.      Clarified details of NDN testbed

We look forward to presenting and discussing more in Singapore.

Best Regards,

Akbar

-----Original Message-----
From: Rahman, Akbar
Sent: Sunday, October 1, 2017 8:19 PM
To: Suthar, Prakash <[email-masked]>; icnrg <[email-masked]>
Cc: Börje Ohlman <[email-masked]>; Oran, Dave <[email-masked]>; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [icnrg] New Version Notification for draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03.txt

Hi Prakash,

Thank you very much for your detailed comments.  I will review them with the rest of the authors and also take up your kind offer to discuss with you off line.  We will plan to update our draft before Singapore to address your comments.

Best Regards,

Akbar

-----Original Message-----
From: icnrg [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Suthar, Prakash
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2017 9:52 PM
To: Rahman, Akbar <[email-masked]>; icnrg <[email-masked]>
Cc: Börje Ohlman <[email-masked]>; Oran, Dave <[email-masked]>; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [icnrg] New Version Notification for draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03.txt

Hi Akbar,
Greeting.
I have reviewed https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03 and I have following comments for enhancement of document.

Section 3.1 –
Paragraph specifies that ICN deployment might be clean-slate replacing large part of network, however considering practical network limitations we should propose ICN deployments as different options.
1.      Clean slate or Native ICN
2.      Dual stack (IPoICN, ICNoIP)
3.      Hybrid (ICN packets encoded inside existing IP ) e.g. hICN proposed by Cisco
4.      Any future technologies..

Can we also refer to dis-aggregations of hardware and software using white boxes that provides a mechanism to tightly integrate ICN protocol inside routing platforms? You can refer to http://www.fiercetelecom.com/telecom/at-t-s-white-box-trial-signals-disaggregated-platform-movement-driving-service-agility

Section 3.4
ICN provides a mechanism to be offered as slice i.e. “ICN-as-a-Slice” in existing IP infrastructure. “ICN-as-a-Slice” can be created using “cross-domain orchestrator”. Cross-domain orchestrator shall be capable of creating resources at service edge, transport (edge and core), applications platforms by automating whole life cycle.  You can also provide reference to Linux foundation OANP for cross-domain orchestrator.

For Hybrid ICN kindly refer to https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/ultra-services-platform/mwc17-hicn-video-wp.pdf). Hybrid ICN (aka hICN) provides mechanism to carry ICN packet information as a payload inside IP datagram.

Section 3.3.2 Edge Network Migration
Para-1: One of my suggestions is to rename “Edge Network” to “Service Edge”. Most of services will be hosted at the edge in MEC, and you can suggest to use any of ICN deployment scenarios (refer sec 3.1).

Para-2: For mobile networks, ICN protocol stack can be integrated in eNodeB. You can refer to our draft draft-suthar-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-03. Section 4.5 provides different mechanisms “ICN deployment in eNodeB”.

Section 4 - Deployment Migration Paths
We should put 4th stake holder as UE or end user because they should be able to indicate how they want to consume content by indicating preference such as IP, ICN or don’t care. In draft-suthar-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-03 section 4.4.1 we have provided options by introducing “transport convergence layer” which can be used to indicate user’s choice.

Section 5.1
Do you want to mention hICN work done by Cisco where we are able to show performance efficiencies using hICN over IP based network? We have released community ICN at fd.io https://wiki.fd.io/view/Cicn

Any deployment or testbed reference to scalable Name resolution and NSLR will be helpful. My colleague Anil has done testing at scale for NSLR and you can cite reference.

Section 7
Para-1: Update with hICN.

On 9/7/17, 12:03 PM, "David Oran" <[email-masked]> wrote:

   I checked the minutes and it isn’t clear who the second volunteer was.
   Hannu, did you volunteer to review the -03 version?

   On 14 Aug 2017, at 15:03, Rahman, Akbar wrote:

   > Hi Chairs,
   >
   > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03
   >
   > We decided to do a quick update of our draft to address the meeting
   > comments from Prague.
   >
   > Prakahsh and Haru (?) - Please use this version for your review
   > comments.
   >
   >
   > Below is a short summary of the updates:
   > -------------------------------------------------------
   > 1.      Added reference to dual mode devices in section 4.1
   > (Application and Service Migration) and referenced Prakash’s
   > “Native ICN for LTE” as an example.
   > 2.      Added a summary section of deployment trial experiences in new
   > section 5.3 to draw conclusions from our analysis of the various
   > deployments.
   >        •       This addresses Eve Schooler’s question of
   > “whether ICN technology is ready for prime time deployment?”
   > 3.      Scrubbed section 6 “further standardization” and added
   > some more items (i.e. OAM, SFC impacts) to summary of protocol gaps
   > Table 1 and corresponding text.
   > 4.      Added references to ICN over Low Power WLAN experiments from
   > Thomas Schmidt, and added new section 5.2.4. (NDN IoT Trials)
   > 5.      Various editorial updates including:
   >        •       Adding reference to ICNRG Charter in Intro
   >        •       Clarified the differences in the island approach
   > between “ICN-as-an-Overlay” and “ICN-as-an-Underlay” (i.e.
   > former connected by ICN/IP tunnels, and later going through gateways)
   > 6.      Note: We think points 1 and 4 above together address Lixia’s
   > comment on explicitly addressing “native ICN directly on top of
   > wireless”.
   >
   > -------------------------------------------------------
   >
   >
   > Best Regards,
   >
   > Akbar
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > <http://ir.interdigital.com/File/Index?KeyFile=37447876>
   >
   >
   > This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
   > to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is
   > privileged, confidential and/or otherwise protected from disclosure to
   > anyone other than its intended recipient. Unintended transmission
   > shall not constitute waiver of any privilege or confidentiality
   > obligation. If you received this communication in error, please do not
   > review, copy or distribute it, notify me immediately by email, and
   > delete the original message and any attachments. Unless expressly
   > stated in this e-mail, nothing in this message or any attachment
   > should be construed as a digital or electronic signature.
   >
   >
   > -----Original Message-----
   > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
   > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:51 PM
   > To: Ravi Ravindran <[email-masked]>; Trossen, Dirk
   > <[email-masked]>; Dirk Kutscher <[email-masked]>;
   > Ravi Ravindrna <[email-masked]>; Rahman, Akbar
   > <[email-masked]>; Trossen, Dirk
   > <[email-masked]>
   > Subject: New Version Notification for
   > draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03.txt
   >
   >
   > A new version of I-D, draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03.txt
   > has been successfully submitted by Akbar Rahman and posted to the IETF
   > repository.
   >
   > Name:           draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines
   > Revision:       03
   > Title:          Deployment Considerations for Information-Centric
   > Networking (ICN)
   > Document date:  2017-08-14
   > Group:          Individual Submission
   > Pages:          23
   > URL:
   > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03.txt
   > Status:
   > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines/
   > Htmlized:
   > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03
   > Htmlized:
   > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03
   > Diff:
   > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-rahman-icnrg-deployment-guidelines-03
   >
   > Abstract:
   >   Information-Centric Networking (ICN) is now reaching technological
   >   maturity after many years of fundamental research and
   >   experimentation.  This document provides a number of deployment
   >   considerations in the interest of helping the ICN community move
   >   forward to the next step of live deployments.  First, the major
   >   deployment configurations for ICN are described including the main
   >   overlay and underlay approaches.  Then proposed deployment migration
   >   paths are outlined to address major practical issues such as network
   >   and application migration.  Next, selected ICN trial experiences are
   >   summarized.  Finally, protocol areas that require further
   >   standardization are identified to facilitate future interoperable
   > ICN
   >   deployments.
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > 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
   >
   > _______________________________________________
   > icnrg mailing list
   > [email-masked]
   > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg

   DaveO

_______________________________________________
icnrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg