Intent Classification
draft-draft-li-intent-classification-00
| Document | Type |
Replaced Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Chen Li , Ying Cheng , John Strassner , Olga Havel , Weiping Xu | ||
| Last updated | 2018-10-22 | ||
| Replaced by | draft-li-nmrg-intent-classification | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Replaced by draft-li-nmrg-intent-classification | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
RFC 7575 [RFC7575] defines Intent as an abstract high-level policy used to operate the network. Intent management system includes an interface for users to input requests and an engine to translate the intents into the network configuration and manage their lifecycle. Up to now, there is no commonly agreed definition, interface or model of intent. This document discusses what intent means to different stakeholders, describes different ways to classify intent, and an associated taxonomy of this classification.
Authors
Chen Li
Ying Cheng
John Strassner
Olga Havel
Weiping Xu
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)