[Nml-wg] OGF 25 Meeting minutes. Session one (morning session)

[Freek Dijkstra]

NML 2009-03-03, morning session
(Notes by Freek Dijkstra, Lars Fischer and Richard Hughes-Jones)

WELCOME
=======
Jeroen van der Ham and Martin Swany welcome everybody
Jeroen is interim chair for this meeting along with Martin.
Paola Grosso steps down as co-chair, Freek Dijkstra will follow her up
after this meeting.

DELIVERABLE 1
=============
deliverable sent out on mailing list
no comments from group on deliverable 1.
Deliverable #1 was sent to the area directors (Franco Travostino and
Richard Hughes-Jones). Some doubt on procedures. Franco did ask for
names of external reviewers. This was not required, as this is an
informational document only (not a proposed standard). If the external
reviewers have been asked, we will wait for their input. Otherwise,
Franco and Richard will give informal feedback, and the document can be
sent to the document editor.

VXDL (PASCALE VICAT-BLANC PRIMET)
=================================
Talk: Pascale Primet - VXDL: virtual exchange infrastructure description
language.
Slides: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc15522

CARRIOCAS Project: service delivery over ultrahigh capacity networks -
with a view to business models.
The project describes short-lived overlay infrastructures over a fixed
infrastructure. The language VXDL was developed to describes short-lived
overlay infrastructures over a fixed infrastructure. It includes (1)
list of individual resources and groups, (2) network topology, and (3)
executing timeline. The topology description was developed in parallel
to the NML, and it not equal, but the purpose is the same. Links can be
described recursively (a link can contain other links). A UML diagram of
VXDL is available at
http://perso.ens-lyon.fr/guilherme.koslovski/download/vxdl.jpg
Comparison of VXDL and NML elements (see slides)

Pascale proposed to integrate VXDL with GLUE 2.0, which describes
computing resources.
Inder wondered how this works relates to JSDL, a job description
language. Pascale: JSDL is for job description by end users, VXDL is
used to describe virtual infrastructure by intermediate service
providers. Suggestion to look more into this.
Cees: are you describing all existing or available resources? Pascale:
CARRIOCAS publishes functionality, not the availability. That is checked
during reservation request.
Comment: mapping between user request and and network provider
descriptions. How do we map what VXDL (or JSDL) does into "what the
network can provide" (as done in NML) - user requirement view vs.
reseource / network capabilities view, and the mapping between those;
answering "who can give me what I am asking for"
Comment: there's a need for this - but this may not be for this
workgroup; it needs to focus now and allow for this as a future extension.
Pascale: virtualization is future Internet research. It is not clear
were standardization should be done. IETF, IRTF, OGF, ...

Inder: these communities (network and computing communities) do no
understand each other at all, no common language. GLUE defines
end-points, but no network.
Martin: we try to form a liaison with them. For this reason, we asked a
chair of GLUE for external review of the usage document (deliverable #1).
Inder: other user still don't see the network as a configurable
resource, and a collaboration is also an education to others.
Short discussion on GENI and FIRE. Those communities currently are
application-centric and lack repeatability of experiments.
Virtualization working group had a notion of networks, but has been
closed after inactivity.

IDENTIFIERS
===========
Summary talk: Jeroen van der Ham and Freek Dijkstra
Slides: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc15525

Identifiers contain a domain and opaque Parts.
The structure of the opaque part is defined by each domain, and should
not be interpreted by other domains.
String-comparisons should be possible
Several schemes are out there: NURN,URN, URL, GLIF. They are all
basically the same
We really need to make a decision - it's not very important which one we
pick
Agreement: we will propose "urn:ogf:network:<example.net>:[opaque part]"
to the mailing list.

URN:OGF: has to be registered. Richard will sent an e-mail to Joel Replogle.
a. OGF will need to register "urn:ogf" with IANA
(This requires IETF consensus action; per RFC3406, it seems to require a
short informational RFC. Also it will need an OGF web page with the
registration of the sub-divisions)
b. OGF will have to approve use of the sub-division :network: