Minutes IETF111: teas
minutes-111-teas-00

# Minutes for the TEAS 111 WG Session
Version: 8/13/2021

## Session Information
Monday, July 26 2021
16:00-18:00 Session III (UTC-7)
Time Zone Converter:   
https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20210726T230000&p1=1440&p2=tz_pt
Materials:      https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/session/teas Note
taking:    https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-111-teas Meetecho:      
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/ietf111/?group=teas&short=&item=1 Audio
stream:   http://mp3.conf.meetecho.com/ietf111/teas/1.m3u Jabber:
xmpp:teas@jabber.ietf.org?join WG  ICS:       
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/upcoming.ics?filters=teas Session ICS:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/session/28878.ics

Available post session:
Jabber log      http://jabber.ietf.org/logs/teas
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMOrIBKRq7Y

## Slot#   Start   Duration  Information
## #1       16:00   8 min     Title:  Administrivia & WG Status
Draft:
Presenter:      Chairs

Lou Berger: We are working to replace Matt Hartley as WG Secretary -- Thanks to
Matt for his help over the years!

John Scudder: (Regarding <draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-signaling-smp> which is with
the AD) This is in my queue; intend to flush the queue soon.

## #2 (16:07)   16:08   7 min     Title:  WG Draft updates
Draft:  Many
Presenter:      Chairs

No questions/comments

## #3 (16:12)   16:15   5 min     Title:  Applicability of Abstraction and
Control of Traffic Engineered Networks (ACTN) to Packet Optical Integration
Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-actn-poi-applicability-03
Presenter:      Daniel King

No questions/comments

## #4 (16:17)   16:20   10 min    Title:  Overview and Principles of Internet
Traffic Engineering Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-12 Presenter: 
    Adrian Farrel

Tony Li: If this is meant to be a BIS draft, shouldn't the scope remain the
same?

Adrian Farrel: Certainly my question, but if WG decides it wants a wider scope
RFC it stops being a BIS but rather a replacement with additions.

Lou Berger: Comment: careful to not go beyond the scope of the IETF, not to
cover techniques used in proprietary networks. Question: similar as Tony, what
is not covered if we limit to IETF technologies?

Adrian Farrel: I believe that Gyan's comment is not about applying TE to
non-IETF technology, but about applying IETF technology in scopes other than
"the Internet".

Lou Berger: Are we expanding the scope or just clarifying the meaning of TE?

Vishnu Pavan Beeram: You say that it is potentially a large lump of work; not
clear what constitutes that "large lump"; if we limit ourselves to TE as
catered to by IETF technologies, I think most of it is already covered in this
document. So, it would be good to understand what that delta is and then make a
call.

Adrian Farrel: Action to follow on the list with Gyan.

Daniel Voyer: for me TE is something the operator uses to make money with
private network for customers, ex.: IPVPN. Not directly for over the larger
internet.

Adrian Farrel: Meaning of the term "Internet" changes over time. Should be able
to work on some scoping language we can all agree on.

## #5 (16:28) 16:30   10 min    Title:  Framework for IETF Network Slices
Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices-03
Presenter:      Adrian Farrel

Lou Berger: If we have trouble resolving on list we can schedule an interim.

Adrian Farrel: Certainly, so far has not been necessary.

Kireeti Kompella: In terms of service endpoints: when we talk about network
slicing, the endpoint could be the 5g network or an end customer. Are you
thinking that either of them, whomever, would have same slice request actions?

Adrian Farrel: Are you asking in a 3gpp end to end network slice context?

Kireeti Kompella: could be end customer 3gpp endpoint/slice, or an actual end
customer like a service provider end customer. Could be both. The question is
about "How I request a slice" / "what parameters are given"? Would it be the
same regardless who the endpoint is?

Adrian Farrel: No, there are different mechanisms (paper, YANG, API) but at a
somewhat meta level it's the same procedure.

Kireeti Kompella: Agree could be different ways of doing things; I believe you
are saying that it doesn't matter who the customer is.

Lou Berger: Out of time, take this good discussion to the list.

## #6 (16:42) 16:40   8 min    Title:  Applicability of Abstraction and Control
of Traffic Engineered Networks (ACTN) to Network Slicing Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-king-teas-applicability-actn-slicing-10
Presenter:      Daniel King

Daniel King: Would like to determine which of the 3 options to take for the
document.

Adrian Farrel: I'm wary about the content of this document being moved into the
network slices document. Document is large and may create an imbalance.

Joel Halpern(chat): Option 2 seems like a good path.

Lou Berger: We generally adopt and re-arrange later. So generally follow option
2.

## #7 (16:49) 16:48   8  min      Title:  Realizing Network Slices in IP/MPLS
Networks Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet-03
Presenter:      Tarek Saad

Tarek Saad: Believe ready for adoption.

Lou Berger: You mentioned few things regarding private discussions, would like
to see it reflected on list before WG adoption. Also privately said document
could use a bit more explaination/clarification of scope in the document text
itself.

Tarek Saad: Agreed, will make those agreements public on mailing list, happened
last minute

Lou Berger: To clarify, private discussions are good way to achieve moving
forward on topics, would just like to have it reflected in the public list.

Zhenbin(Robin) Li: There's several drafts with overlap that needs coordination,
better to coordinate with the other drafts to refine the text to solve overlap.
Second point, to accelerate network slicing work suggest an interim meeting

## #8 (16:57) 16:56   8  min      Title:  Scalability Considerations for
Enhanced VPN (VPN+) Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dong-teas-enhanced-vpn-vtn-scalability-03
Presenter:      Jie Dong

No time for questions or comments

## #9 (17:05) 17:04   6  min      Title:  Building blocks for Network Slice
Realization in Segment Routing Network Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ali-teas-spring-ns-building-blocks-01
Presenter:      Zafar Ali

No time for questions or comments

## #10 (17:11)  17:10   8  min      Title:  IETF Network Slice Use Cases and
Attributes for Northbound Interface of IETF Network Slice Controllers Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-contreras-teas-slice-nbi-05
Presenter:      Luis M. Contreras

- Was scheduled as #11, order swapped in presentation

Lou Berger: Interested in any objections to adopting the document, please
provide feedback on list

## #11 (17:19) 17:18   8  min      Title:  Instantiation of IETF Network Slices
in Service Providers Networks Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-barguil-teas-network-slices-instantation-02
Presenter:      Luis M. Contreras

- Was scheduled as #10, order swapped in presentation

Lou Berger: Great to hear if any interest in the document

Daniel Voyer: I would be delighted to see more on your document you just
presented. Obvious I'm coming from an operator perspective and these are hot
topics.

Lou Berger: Personally, I agree.

## #12 (17:26)  17:26   8  min      Title:  A Yang Data Model for IETF Network
Slice NBI Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wd-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-03
Presenter:      Bo Wu

Lou Berger: This topic has received a lot of interest, and need to decide with
the WG if it's a good starting point. Not much time, so will definitely take to
the list.

## #13 (17:34)  17:34   8  min      Title:  IETF Network Slice YANG Data Model
Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-liu-teas-transport-network-slice-yang-04
Presenter:      Xufeng Liu

Vishnu Pavan Beeram: Do you see this as an NBI model or is it something that
comes into play after the service request comes in?

Xufeng Liu: I think the doc before (<draft-contreras-teas-slice-nbi>) discusses
how we use this model and other models. Looking at the ACTN document, this
model is equivalent to type 2 service. The other one
(<draft-wd-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang>) is type 1. The model usage is
also described in the ACTN VN yang draft, so they have the different scenarios
and different setups, either in the middle of the network stack or at the top.
Depends on use case.

Vishnu Pavan Beeram: Okay. I guess if the consumer has some notion of the
topology, then they should be able to use it. But that does not seem to be
articulated in the document scope.

Xufeng Liu: Sure, we will do that. There are several documents discussing the
scope of type 2 - draft-contreras-teas-slice-nbi and ACTN VN Yang documents.

## #14 (17:42)  17:42   8  min      Title:  A VTN Network YANG Module
Draft:  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wd-teas-vtn-network-yang-00
Presenter:      Bo Wu

No questions or comments

## #15 (17:48)  17:50   5  min      Title:  A YANG Data Model for MPLS-TE
Topology Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-busizheng-teas-yang-te-mpls-topology-01
Presenter:      Italo Busi

Lou Berger: Is there any interest in the WG. Would like to know if anyone has
any general interest in this topic, or do not think we should be working on
this? <no response from WG> Discuss on the list probably best since end of the
day.

Italo Busi: We will ping the list.

## #16 (17:53)  17:55   5  min      Title:  Profiles for Traffic Engineering
(TE) Topology Data Model Draft: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-busi-teas-te-topology-profiles-02
Presenter:      Italo Busi

Scott Mansfield(Chat): This is good work. Something I would like to see more of
in the TE-TOPO work is a more thorough explanation of the difference between
supporting-node/supporting-link and overlay/underlay.

Lou Berger: Similar as previous document, is there interest to work on this?

Scott Mansfield: <pointed out own comment in chat> This is good stuff, would
like to see some things clarified.

Lou Berger: Appreciate the feedback

## Adjourn 18:00