Qin -
It puzzles me that you should take umbrage at my statement,
when it seems that you are in full agreement with my point
in response to Tom's stated assumption.
Randy
On 2021-03-17 6:06 PM, Qin Wu wrote:
Randy:
We feel that we are victim of this discussion with confusing title. I don’t
want to comment on whether the intent is right or it is time for intent or not,
you have your judgement, but:
1. The liaison is sent to NMRG instead of this WG since they believe the more
relevant work is over there. (https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1724/)
2. The intent in different context means different things, intent translation,
intent mapping, combining with AL/ML is not in the scope of this work.
3. The ECA model borrows similar concept from RMON which is successfully
specified by IETF, ROMN is extension of SNMP, provides traffic flow data for
troubleshooting and provides the control to adjust for better performance. So
why not ECA
4. ECA is abstracted from bottom up and use telemetry protocol as a good basis
and provide a clear semantics which is different from intent you quoted from
elsewhere.
-Qin
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: netmod [mailto:netmod-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Randy Presuhn
发送时间: 2021年3月18日 6:47
收件人: netmod@ietf.org
主题: Re: [netmod] ECA Policy: What is an adequate abstraction level to express
policies and intent
Hi -
On 2021-03-17 4:15 AM, tom petch wrote:
From: netmod <netmod-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Randy Presuhn
<randy_pres...@alumni.stanford.edu>
Sent: 10 March 2021 18:28
On 2021-03-10 12:43 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
Dear Qin,
I believe this work repeats failures of the past but since the WG
agreed to entertain this, I will keep my mouth shut. I suggest you do
not spend your energy to convince the that this work is viable since
it is rather unlikely that I will change my mind.
<tp>
Meanwhile the ITU-T has just liaised the IETF that it is starting work on
intent-based management. I have not looked to see if the same words mean the
same thing but guess that they do.
:-) A risky guess, based on my experience. I vividly remember an
X3T5.4 meeting in which we *thought* we were wrapping things up, until someone
(me) foolishly drew an E-R diagram on the whiteboard, causing us to realize
that although we thought we had reached agreement, we had in fact been using
the same words strung together in the same order to talk about radically
different models.
Randy
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
