Minutes interim-2019-nmrg-05: Thu 17:00
||Minutes interim-2019-nmrg-05: Thu 17:00
NMRG Virtual Meeting May 2019
Thursday 23-05-2019 17:00-19-00 CEST
Laurent Ciavaglia (co-chair, Nokia), Jérôme François (co-chair, INRIA),
Jeferson Nobre (secretary, UFRGS), Dean Bogdanovic (Volta Networks), Jeff
Tantsura (Apstra), Egemen Cetinkaya (Verizon); Julien Maisonneuve (Nokia),
Sabine Randriamasy (Nokia), Luis Contreras (Telefonica), Vishnu Ram
(Technical Consultant, ITU-T ML5G FG), Shagufta Henna (TSSG), Alex Clemm
* Agenda: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-interim-2019-nmrg-05-nmrg-01/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2019-nmrg-05/session/nmrg * Webex:
05min. - Short introduction of new co-chair: Jérôme.
05min. - Status of the WG, next meetings, etc.
60min. - Status progress on Intent Based Networking topic
IBN some challenges and research directions
Work plan refinement
20min. - Network AI Challenge project
Interest expressed from Vishnu Ram (ITU-T ML5G FG)
Draft framework, Jérôme & Laurent
15min. - Modus Operandi for virtual meetings
What is working well and not
Dedicated meeting per topic? Alternate meetings per time zone
Input: more proactive, only presentations or something more/different
Output: minutes and actions, need more?
How to follow-up between meetings? I-D updates, central place for work
plan, progress and issue tracking, back-end / front-end
xxmin. - Any other business?
- Agenda bashing
- Jérôme presentation
IBN some challenges and research directions
Dean: In respect to intent from existing systems, there is configuration in the
system... Old rules that are still in the systems and are not relevant anymore.
Need some sort of "garbage collector"
Jeff: what is the single source of truth? What the delta of the intent state
and the operational state? The brown field is a complex topic. There are known
frameworks for ACL (references?)
Dean: Single source of truth is the configuration files which are written by
humans, but which becomes lost because people leave the organization. Hard
problem as seen by people from the operational side.
Jeff: API for users to express the intent...
Laurent: from legacy point of view, it is needed a path to enable the
interopetation in order to perform intent extraction from the CLI. It is
necessary more data to analyse it.
Jeff: I don't see how to do this fully automatic (intent extraction?).
Jeff: It is needed to reach consensus in distributed systems (refer to slide
10) about the intent state across the system, Cannot rely on a centralized
entity, so have to degin/evaluate a system based on consensus with distributed
entities and see the cost ratio (performance vs. complexity). Stateless and
central entity, could be path for lots or research.
Jeff: Planning changes through intent, how it is done? Telemetry framework
being proposed by the IETF, it could be some colaboration. abstracting the view
from telemetry and linking to the intent deployment.
Dean: updates on intent, how they would work?
Laurent: it depends how dependencies on intent would be formulated.
Dean: Intent as an atomic action avoids the dependecies problem.
Laurent: there will be relationships among intents, this could be included in
- IBN Work Plan
Jeff: terminology first.
Dean: garbage colection routine, potentially added to the work plan?
Laurent: formalize the problem and see from there.
- Network AI Challenge
Vishnu: Uses cases, we have analyzed several use cases considering 5G e future
networks. Vishnu: ITU Focus group on this topic. Vishnu: We want to participate
in the defintions of any of this aspects.
Laurent: form a team to define/document the Network AI challenge.
Jéferson: how do you think that we should pursue that? as a draft?
Laurent: no specific recommendation on form, could be draft, doc, slides
Eventually, if useful to document challenge framework as an I-D to be re-usable.
Dean: would rather see a challenge linking IBN and autonomic networking, incl.
ANIMA. more realistic, indutry expectations. Jeff: I could be interested if it
is not too general (AI challenge) Laurent: Jérôme would be involved (lead
co-chair on the project). Vishnu ok to be part of the team.
- Virtual meetings
Laurent: wnat to know areas of improvement, what we can do to have
efficient/useful meeting. propose issue/topic for more in-depth discussion
during the meeting. Jeff: some level of project management would be great
Jéferson: forming teams maybe would be helpul to track advances Alex: Meetings
are fine Laurent: careful no to slide to some traditional project management
and to no create 'groups within the group" with the design teams. But if this
is what the RG is aksing we will implement that. Laurent: Virutal meetings
specific for IBN? Dean: ?