Minutes IETF106: nmrg
minutes-106-nmrg-00

Meeting Minutes Network Management (nmrg) RG
Title Minutes IETF106: nmrg
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2019-12-13

Meeting Minutes
minutes-106-nmrg

NMRG 57th meeting
IETF 106, Singapore

****************
Overall summary:
        . 2 first IBN drafts to call for RG adoption.
        (draft-li-nmrg-intent-classification and draft-clemm-nmrg-dist-intent)
        . Revised charter available and under final evaluation, containing
        updated research agenda reflecting the IBN, Network Management AI and
        Self-driving/-managing frameworks work plan. . Report on IBN practical
        activities with demos and tools. . Connections to other proposed
        frameworks and activities in IETF OPS and NETMOD on ECA framework for
        self-management and Service Assurance Graph related to IBN. . First
        steps on Network management Articificial Intelligence with proposition
        for a Research Challenges document. . First proposal for Network
        Management AI Challenge and stabilization of the Network Management AI
        Challenge framework.

*********************************
*********** Session 1 ***********
Thursday 2019/11/21 10:00 - 12:00
Room: Olivia

Remote participants (4): Mouli Chandramouli, Olga Havel, Will Liu, Rafael
Martins

Agenda:
    1. Introduction + RG information, Chairs
    2. Quick report on October interim meeting on practical aspects of IBN, and
    follow-ups, Chairs 3. Status and progress of active I-Ds 3.1 Update on
    Intent Classification, Olga Havel (remote)
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-nmrg-intent-classification/
    Jérôme (as participant): criteria on "feedback". seems exclusive (feedback
    or not). the demanding user may not need feedback on the realization, but
    the network administrator could require feedback/information. Olga:
    correct. in the table, it is specified if the user is non-technical or
    technical (administrator). Alex: not clear in the tables: how going to use
    them, very detailed. different methods applied for different cases, or as a
    catalog. Olga: advice come from Laurent. intent was to classify the
    PoC/demos using the draft and thus ended up with the mapping table
    proposal. How many read the draft: 11+, useful: same+ ; ready for adoption:
    a few/mixed. Chairs will send call on the mailing list and check based on
    feedback.

    3.2 Update on IBN Concepts and Overview, Alex Clemm
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-clemm-nmrg-dist-intent/
    Diego: categories still missing in the other draft. something that could be
    done there. security considerations: important and long forgotten. desserve
    more attention: intent security and how to express security intents. How
    many read the draft: 12+, useful: same ; ready for adoption: 10. Chairs
    will send call on the mailing list and check based on feedback.

    4. Technical presentations and discussion
    4.1 IBN for network slicing in  5G-EVE project, Luis M. Contreras,
    Laurent: orientation of the draft: type of draft (informational,
    experimental), for IETF or IRTF? Luis: work on making the EVE interface
    really compliant with GSMA/3GPP NS template.

    4.2 A Solution for Goal-oriented Policy Refinement in NFV Management and
    Orchestration Systems, Michel Sales Bonfim What is DL =  Description Logic.
    HTN = Hierarchical Task Decomposition Diego: planning descisoin done once,
    or regularly? Michel: short overview. another mechanism. solution can
    detect if policies are not working properly. the planner can generate
    alarms, when triggered can reconfiguration Diego: NFVO inject NS goals...
    Michel: extension to NFVO to have goals in the NS descriptor. Diego: in the
    planner, consider interactions between different NS goals? Michel: not
    considered yet. Laurent; clarification on the acronm 'HTN'. method used for
    task decomposition. Laurent: other proposals exists for task composition,
    related work? Michel: paper under submission, we can discuss more the
    related work (there are many papers for sure) Laurent: relationships with
    the proposed lifecycle, exchange with drafts' authors. encourage to link
    with the group for practical aspects (tools/demos), and the
    concept/lifecycle work as contribution for the different functionalities
    (decompositoin, conflict...).

    4.3 Intent-based networking for OTT applications: concepts, lifecycle and
    challenges, Sabine Randriamasy Dean: "emergence" traffic? -> Sabine:
    emergency (in the sense of high priority, critical communication) Diego:
    topology is essential in composition. How do you define a slice? Sabine:
    slice = cloud + network resources to run the applications, chain of
    functions, so basically connectiviy + application. Diego: Change OTT >
    Verticals. Dean: multiple service topologies per slice. Sabine: agree. this
    presentation skips the intent definition step. here very simple example.
    more complex scenarios possible.

    4.4 Service Assurance for Intent-based Networking Architecture, Benoît
    Claise
    https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-claise-opsawg-service-assurance-architecture-00
    Laurent: Assurance graph can be used in the IBN lifecycle. Can be used as a
    tool for this step in the lifecycle. Where the proposal would fit in the
    IBN architecture? Benoît: consder intent as a service definition. From the
    specific service type that is described, we can deduce the specific actions
    and so the tree. Jeff: L3VPN not an intent. need upper layer to process the
    intent, and then map to lower layer choosing e.g. L3VPN to instantiate the
    service. Alex: it is not really intent-specific but more widely usable. How
    to maintain these assurance graphs? practical issues? Benoît: partly from
    the definition itself, from network configuration.

    4.5 Framework for Use of ECA (Event Condition Action) in Network
    Self-Management, Daniel King
    https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bwd-netmod-eca-framework-00 Diego: yes to
    the 3 questions raised in the presentation, esp. link with intent
    framework, e.g. for the low-level application of intent. Laurent: on Q2:
    ECA can be at the end of chain of intent realization, so there are
    relations to clarify and develop.

        Proposal (RG chairs): send drafts from Benoit and Dan and to the NMRG
        mailng list ask feedback from the group. Where it would fit in the RG
        work (on IBN in particular).

    4.6 Next steps on Architecture and functionalities, use cases and
    techniques  remaining time. 5. AOB
        items skipped due to lack of time.

*********************************
*********** Session 2 ***********
Friday 2019/11/22 12:20 – 13:50
Room: Collyer

Remote participants: 4

Agenda:

        1. NMRG recharter, Chairs
        Dean: management architecture concern. not changed in last 20 years.
        may be re-thinking the basic mgt arch. (against controller/agent),
        other options. gather requirements. lots of new paths. can those paths
        be done over existing arch. running into problems is using the curent
        arch. to do e.g. autonomics. would be curious to hear from the
        community. Jérôme: see that in the charter. please bring it to the
        mailing list. Colin: if proposals for arch. could be topic for conclude
        IBN resonable plan. suggest the rate of progress, not as energetic as
        other groups. intesify. AI for NM. plausible topics of the future.
        looking at today's agenda. if Netwokr AI, could be a good sign for the
        recharter. if only reports from other groups, then sign of low
        interest/issue. Colin: use another term than self-driving networks, too
        close to self-driving car. Alex: having AI for network in the charter
        as a means to attract community. Colin: should not be a a goal in the
        charter to see if there is a Network AI community. there should be
        already enough interest before going into the charter. Will: following
        other activiites...? (don't got it fully) Marie-Jose: how AI can help
        NM work. not only study AI for network.

        2. Artificial intelligence for networking and network for AI
    2.1 Adversarial Network Benchmarking, Andreas Blenk
    Dean: interesting work. draft from Comcast. point to you.

    2.2 AI activities in other communities
    2.2.a) ETSI ISG Experiential Networked Intelligence (ENI), Will Liu

    2.2.b) ETSI ISG Zero-touch network and Service Management (ZSM), Laurent
    Ciavaglia Will: ENI and ZSM will have colocated meeting in December in
    France

    2.2.c) IEEE ETI for Network Intelligence (NI), Laurent Ciavaglia
    Jerome: what are the actions of the ETI NI on  "network data as a key
    challenge" Laurent: no clear path yet, identifying it as a clear challenge
    was our first goal, next steps consist in documenting items detailing types
    of network data and how commplex for AI. Dean: we have already today basic
    sets of data to be used (and identified). It gives you some starting points
    rather than trying to take all and then find what's relevant. Laurent:
    agree from operational point of view. Diego: operatorational teams do not
    report so much, we may share something in IETF 107 or 108 (Madrid)  on Data
    Representation Framework. Nalini: enteprise network. encryption everywhere.
    how to run AI on encrypted data. packet data and meta-data at the end
    points is also very challenging Laurent: no experience on encrypted user
    data for use with AI techniques. more on the network management data (logs,
    scripts, config files), you can access these data sets (as an operator).
    Jérôme may have better feedback on the use of AI with user data. there are
    also data that you can access from a netman point of view.

    2.2.d) ITU-T FG on Machine Learning for Future Networks including 5G
    (ML5G), Vishnu RAM OV

    2.3 Network AI challenge
    2.3.a) Update on the NMRG activity on the AI challenge, Jérôme François

    2.3.b) Challenge proposition, Albert Cabellos
    NMRG welcomes the challenge. Let us know how NMRG can help. RG, if
    interest, please contact Albert or the chairs.

    2.4 Wrap-up of Network AI side meeting, Chairs
    Shen: work on labeled data sets that can be re-used.
    Jérôme: agree we need to have that. however, data will be diverse so
    universal decrpition will not be always suitable. Who's interested in
    contributing to the report: 5-6 participants expressed interest to actively
    contribute.

        end of meeting.