Subject: Re: [Supa] [[email-masked]: I-D Action: draft-l3vpn-service-yang-00.txt]

From: Tina TSOU <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 06:40:19 +0000

Dear Juergen et al,

Thank you for pointing out it.

IMO, both draft-l3vpn-service-yang and draft-zaalouk-supa-vpn-service-management-model are aimed to abstract the Layer 3 IP VPN YANG model on top of the management system. 

The YANG Model architecture in these two drafts are the same, including the vpn-service global parameters and access-sites parameters, and the key parameters for a VPN service are nearly have the same definition. But draft-l3vpn-service-yang have more definition details besides the main VPN YANG model arthiceture, for example, the protection mode, QOS requirments, IP address allocation, VPN policy definition and some templates definition. These definitions should be added to supa vpn service management model. By the way, draft-l3vpn-service-yang has described the management system action in detail after recieving a VPN service requirement using this vpn service yang model, and these are also the same as supa idea. 

For these reasons above, draft-zaalouk-supa-vpn-service-management-model could make a combination with this draft-l3vpn-service-yang.

But supa-vpn-service-management-model has a big difference from the l3vpn-service-yang, that is how to get the physical access position of an exact access site. In l3vpn-service-yang, some parameters and constrains like location and site-diversity are defined to help the management system to select appropriate PE or POP for the exact access site. To achive this purpose，the management system should maintain the PE or POP pools. This deployment will restrict the access site movement requirement, which is the main highlight of supa design. Supa allows the user access sites access to the network anywhere and the VPN configuration for network element can be created and deleted dynamically, which can shortest the service deployment period. 

For the difference above, I would encourage authors of draft-zaalouk-supa-vpn-service-management-model have a deep discussion with authors of draft-l3vpn-service-yang.

Thank you,
Tina

-----Original Message-----
From: Supa [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 12:32 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Supa] [[email-masked]: I-D Action: draft-l3vpn-service-yang-00.txt]

Hi,

this might be relevant related work...

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

---

From: "Dacheng Zhang" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:29:56 +0800

Sure, look forward to future discussions.

Cheers

Dacheng

在 15-3-2 下午2:40， "Tina TSOU" <[email-masked]> 写入:

>IMO, both draft-l3vpn-service-yang and
>draft-zaalouk-supa-vpn-service-management-model are aimed to abstract the
>Layer 3 IP VPN YANG model on top of the management system.
>
>The YANG Model architecture in these two drafts are the same, including
>the vpn-service global parameters and access-sites parameters, and the
>key parameters for a VPN service are nearly have the same definition. But
>draft-l3vpn-service-yang have more definition details besides the main
>VPN YANG model arthiceture, for example, the protection mode, QOS
>requirments, IP address allocation, VPN policy definition and some
>templates definition. These definitions should be added to supa vpn
>service management model. By the way, draft-l3vpn-service-yang has
>described the management system action in detail after recieving a VPN
>service requirement using this vpn service yang model, and these are also
>the same as supa idea.
>
>For these reasons above, draft-zaalouk-supa-vpn-service-management-model
>could make a combination with this draft-l3vpn-service-yang.
>
>But supa-vpn-service-management-model has a big difference from the
>l3vpn-service-yang, that is how to get the physical access position of an
>exact access site. In l3vpn-service-yang, some parameters and constrains
>like location and site-diversity are defined to help the management
>system to select appropriate PE or POP for the exact access site. To
>achive this purpose，the management system should maintain the PE or POP
>pools. This deployment will restrict the access site movement
>requirement, which is the main highlight of supa design. Supa allows the
>user access sites access to the network anywhere and the VPN
>configuration for network element can be created and deleted dynamically,
>which can shortest the service deployment period.
>
>For the difference above, I would encourage authors of
>draft-zaalouk-supa-vpn-service-management-model have a deep discussion
>with authors of draft-l3vpn-service-yang.
>
>
>Thank you,
>Tina
>
>_______________________________________________
>Supa mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/supa

---

From: Tina TSOU <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 00:43:13 +0000

Dear Dacheng,

There is a new discussion list mailto:[email-masked].

Let's discuss from here. Would the authors of both two drafts verify my understanding?

Thank you,
Tina

On Mar 2, 2015, at 4:30 PM, Dacheng Zhang <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

Cheers

Dacheng

在 15-3-2 下午2:40， "Tina TSOU" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> 写入:

Dear Juergen et al,

Thank you,
Tina

-----Original Message-----
From: Supa [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Juergen
Schoenwaelder
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 12:32 AM
To: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
Subject: [Supa] [[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>: I-D Action:
draft-l3vpn-service-yang-00.txt]

Hi,

/js

_______________________________________________
Supa mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/supa