Subject: Re: [Supa] draft-bi-supa-gap-analysis

From: "Dacheng Zhang" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 18:08:21 +0800

Hi, john:
The mapping draft attempts to answer the question about how the models
defined in SUPA will be processed by software to produce configuration
details for actual devices, and it only provides guideline for mapping
policy into device level configuration rather than the algorithms like what
are described in your paper “Ontology Mapping for the Interoperability
Problem in Network Management 2007”.
         So, some questions: ^_^
         1: In your paper “Towards Autonomic Management of Communications
Networks”, there seems to be only one entity-autonomic network management
system( see the figure as below), however, in the architecture of SUPA,
there are two main entities- service manager and network manager/controller,
then, which functions of autonomic network management system should exist in
service manager and which functions should exist in network work
manager/controller, and once the functions are separated in different
entities, what the interfaces between these functions would be looked like?
       2: currently, the mapping draft only cover the translation  from
policies( I’m also not sure which policy(business? System? Administrator) is
going to be modeled in SUPA) to vender-neutral configuration( which we
called protocol-specific configuration in the mapping draft), and then to
device-level configuration, in the following figure, I guess we only cover
the translation from administrator to device to instance in the policy
processing block, and we are lack of the translation between the other
policies in this block, would you please give some more details about how
these policies will be created , translated and work?
         3:What exactly “policy translation” in your PPT( which list in
below), and the “policy language translation”? are they the same?