# Minutes for the TEAS 114 WG Session   {#minutes-for-the-teas-114-wg-session}

Please help capture the discussion in-line below.  
No need to cover what is on the slides, just the discussion.  
Please also (optionally) add you name here:

### Note takers:   {#note-takers}

Adrian Farrel  
Sergio Belotti  
Luis M. Contreras

# TEAS Agenda For IETF 114   {#teas-agenda-for-ietf-114}

Version: Jul 12, 2022

## Monday, July 25 2022   {#monday-july-25-2022}

10:00-12:00 Session I (Philadelphia local time, UTC-4)  
Time Zone Converter:
https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20220725T140000&p1=1440&p2=198

Materials: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/114/session/teas  
Note taking: https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-114-teas#both  
Meetecho:
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/ietf114/?group=teas&short=&item=1  
Onsite tool:
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/onsite114/?group=teas&short=&item=1  
Audio stream: https://mp3.conf.meetecho.com/ietf114/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/114/sessions/teas.ics

## Available post session:   {#available-post-session}

Recording: http://www.meetecho.com/ietf114/recordings#TEAS  
Jabber log http://jabber.ietf.org/logs/teas  
YouTube:

## Slot# Start Duration Information   {#slot-start-duration--information}

## #1 10:00 8 min Title: Administrivia & WG Status   {#1-1000-8-min-title-administrivia--wg-status}

Draft:   
Presenter: Chairs

## #2 10:08 10 min Title: WG Draft Updates   {#2-1008-10-min-title-wg-draft-updates}

Draft: Many (26 WG documents at this stage)  
Presenter: Chairs

(on draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis)  
Lou Berger: Post LC, with some notable changes. Please review the
document this week and anyone with comments (especially considering the
changes to the document since last call), please bring them up to the
list or editor ASAP

(on draft-ietf-teas-actn-pm-telemetry-autonomics)  
Dhruv Dhody: issues on the Models imported (XML validation). The best
would be if authors of TE models (or those knowing to use them) with a
good setup can provide help.  
Pavan Beeram: please, volunteers for these are welcome to reach out
Dhruv for help.

(on draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-controller-inter-work)  
Yi Lin: Think the work is done. Ask WG for reviewing the document.

## #3 10:18 10 min Title: Updated Common YANG Data Types for Traffic Engineering   {#3-1018-10-min-title-updated-common-yang-data-types-for-traffic-engineering}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-rfc8776-update-00 

Presenter: Italo Busi  
(start 10:15)

Tarek Saad: question on the union. Do we rely on parsing the value to
know if it is dotted-quad or URI? It could be error prone.  
Italo Busi: good question, to be disucssed during the progress of the
document.

Italo Busi: question about procedural approach in relation with
RFC8776-bis vs defining new YANG module. Do we need a lightweight
approach to updating published YANG models?  
John Scudder: encourage to limit the review to small changes in the text
so no need of reopening past issues.  
Italo Busi: ok with this approach.  
Lou Berger: there is no reason to not go to LC as soon as the draft has
been cleaned up with the last comments.

## #4 10:28 10 min Title: Applicability of Abstraction and Control of Traffic Engineered Networks (ACTN) to Packet Optical Integration (POI)   {#4-1028-10-min-title-applicability-of-abstraction-and-control-of-traffic-engineered-networks-actn-to-packet-optical-integration-poi}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-actn-poi-applicability-07

Presenter: Italo Busi  
(start 10:26)

Pavan Beeram: during last meeting the recommendation was to follow a
technology agnostic approach, but my impression is that this has not
been completely followed  
Italo Busi: we tried to generalize but it could be not totally done. To
discuss offline.

## #5 10:38 10 min Title: IETF Network Slice Service YANG Model   {#5-1038-10-min-title-ietf-network-slice-service-yang-model}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang-02

Presenter: Reza Rokui  
(start: 10:35)

Lou Berger: in other models we add a place for technology specific
augmentations possibly using a 'choice' statement, rather than using
opaque values.  
Reza Rokui: please, send us an example

Pavan Beeram: Regarding issue 4, I think it is useful in certain
scenarios to present the customer with some abstract view of the
topology based on which the service requests can then be made. We have
existing ways to present customized topologies to the client -- those
can be leveraged here.

## #6 10:48 8 min Title: YANG Data Model for Network Resource Partition Policy   {#6-1048-8-min-title-yang-data-model-for-network-resource-partition-policy}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bestbar-teas-yang-nrp-policy-01

Presenter: Tarek Saad  
(start: 10:45)

Adrian Farrel: Unclear about mode "b" (control plane only). Is partition
hapenning in a central controller with the data plane being unaware of
the partitioning which is known by the control plane?  
Tarek Saad: Correct. It could be in a controller or on the device in the
control plane (e.g., RSVP-TE) without the data plane being aware.  
Adrian Farrel: It could be convenient to elaborate this a bit more on
the draft.

## #7 10:56 8 min Title: A YANG Data Model for Network Resource Partition (NRP)   {#7-1056-8-min-title-a-yang-data-model-for-network-resource-partition-nrp}

Draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wd-teas-nrp-yang-01  
Presenter: Bo Wu  
(start: 10:53)

(Audio problems moved to end)

## #8 11:04 5 min Title: Framework for End-to-End IETF Network Slicing   {#8-1104-5-min-title-framework-for-end-to-end-ietf-network-slicing}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-li-teas-e2e-ietf-network-slicing-02

Presenter: Jie Dong  
(start: 10:55)

John Mulooly: instead of concatenating NRPs, should it not be considered
the concatenation of IETF Network Slices per transport domain? That
could be a more modular approach.  
Jie Dong: what you mention can be considered as the inter-domain option
A when different network slice endpoints at the domain border nodes that
concatenate network slices services.   
John Mulooly: maybe you should consider it at the hierarchical level as
a controller problem on how to manage the connections at the different
slices.  
Jie Dong: yes, this scenario can be considered, as well.

## #9 11:09 5 min Title: Considerations about Hierarchical IETF Network Slices   {#9-1109-5-min-title-considerations-about-hierarchical-ietf-network-slices}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dong-teas-hierarchical-ietf-network-slice-01

Presenter: Jie Dong  
(start: 11:02)

\[Note: This is clubbed with Slot #8\]

Lou Berger: As discussed for the last meeting for the first document,
and applicable to both these two documents, better to take the cotent
and put it on existing documents. There are WG documents that at least
some of the text can be moved into.

## #10 11:14 8 min Title: Segment Routing based Solution for Hierarchical IETF Network Slices   {#10-1114-8-min-title-segment-routing-based-solution-for-hierarchical-ietf-network-slices}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gong-teas-hierarchical-slice-solution-00

Presenter: Liyan Gong  
(start: 11:08)

Pavan Beeram: suggestion to present the draft to SPRING

## #11 11:22 8 min Title: Considerations about Generalized IETF Network Slicing   {#11-1122-8-min-title-considerations-about-generalized-ietf-network-slicing}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-li-teas-generalized-ietf-network-slicing-00

Presenter: Zhenbin Li  
(start: 11:17)

Luay Jalil: it seems your approach is about static allocation of
resoruces rather than dynamic, is that correct?  
Zhenbin Li: Not sure to get your point. This is about issues about NRP
reosurces that can be used for bandwidth, topology, security, etc.

Pavan Beeram: same comments as the one provided to Jie Dong; for the
IETF network slice specific aspects, consider proposing text to the
ietf-network-slices document and for the NRP specific aspects, consider
proposing text to the ns-ip-mpls document.

## #12 11:30 8 min Title: IETF Network Slice Application in 5G End-to-End Network Slice   {#12-1130-8-min-title-ietf-network-slice-application-in-5g-end-to-end-network-slice}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gcdrb-teas-5g-network-slice-application-00

Presenter: Reza Rokui  
(start: 11:26)

Xueyan Song: comment about open issue on the terminology regaring 5G e2e
network slice or 5G network slice. My preference is 5G network slice,
since 5G e2e network slice scope is out of 3GPP (i.e., the connection of
UPF to DN is out of 3GPP scope).   
Two question, one about scope of the document. I notice that the scope
has an overlap with BBF work (BBF TR 522). I think that IETF should send
a liaison to BBF about his work. Second question is about the solution.

Lou Berger: please take your remaining questions to the list (short on
time and 2 others in queue)

Luay Jalil: This document is specific for 5G but we have other access
networks, such as wireline, which could deserve another specific
document. This is to me a mapping draft, not treatment.

Srihari Sangli: Having end to end into the picture is definitely good.

## #13 11:38 7 min Title: A Realization of IETF Network Slices for 5G Networks Using Current IP/MPLS Technologies   {#13-1138-7-min-title-a-realization-of-ietf-network-slices-for-5g-networks-using-current-ipmpls-technologies}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srld-teas-5g-slicing-00  
Presenter: Krzysztof Szarkowicz  
(start: 11:38)

Adrian Farrel: Nice detailed and helpful document that is very readbale.
However, I don't think sections \[post-facto correction\] 2 and 4 are
IETF material. They are useful description on how 5G works but not sure
if should be documented in IETF (and what if there is a conflict between
this and 3gpp work?). Additionally, using a defualt NRP is an acceptable
approach, but it would be good to describe the limitations as well as
the benefits of that approach.

Reza Rokui: I suggest to use the terminology of the framework document t
be consistent with framework docucment.

Jie Dong (from chat): It seems the first part of this draft overlaps
with the previous presentation (draft)  
Krzysztof: Agreed. Need to work together

## #14 11:46 5 min Title: DC aware TE topology model   {#14-1146-5-min-title-dc-aware-te-topology-model}

Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-llc-teas-dc-aware-topo-model-02

Presenter: Luis Contreras  
(start: 11:46)

## #15 11:51 7 min Title: Precision Availability Metrics for SLO-Governed End-to-End Services   {#15-1151-7-min-title-precision-availability-metrics-for-slo-governed-end-to-end-services}

Draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-mhmcsfh-ippm-pam-01  
Presenter: Greg Mirsky  
(start: skipped)

(Presenter not in the room)

## #7 10:56 7 min Title: A YANG Data Model for Network Resource Partition (NRP)   {#7-1056-7-min-title-a-yang-data-model-for-network-resource-partition-nrp}

Draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wd-teas-nrp-yang-01  
Presenter: Bo Wu  
(Audio problems moved to end)  
(start: 11:52)

Lou Berger: Tight aligment with the NRP policy draft. What are yout
thoughts on that?  
Bo Wu: no conclusion yet. From our side, we see a lot of commonalities.
We think we can merge into one draft, showing different topology
creation options.  
Lou Berger: Merging makes sense

Adjourn 11:59