[Nsi-wg] NSI WG call Wed Sep 7, 2011

Tomohiro Kudoh t.kudoh at aist.go.jp
Thu Sep 8 07:31:59 CDT 2011 

John

Ok. This is the information we have been looking for.

Thanks,

Tomohiro

2011/9/8 John MacAuley <john.macauley at surfnet.nl>:
> For HTTP BASIC authentication we will use the following credentials.  I believe this should pass most complex password rules...
>
> userId: nsidemo
> password: RioPlug-Fest2011!
>
> If there are any issues let me know.
>
> John.
>
> On 2011-09-08, at 8:20 AM, Tomohiro Kudoh wrote:
>
>> John,
>>
>> If so, what is the password?
>>
>> Also, it will be not easy to make username case in-sensitive.
>>
>> Tomohiro
>>
>>
>>
>> 2011/9/8 John MacAuley <john.macauley at surfnet.nl>:
>>> We agreed that the NSA with authenticate using http basic authentication.  The user credentials are in the NSI message.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On 2011-09-08, at 2:55 AM, Tomohiro Kudoh <t.kudoh at aist.go.jp> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi John, Jerry,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to confirm decisions.
>>>>
>>>> - We will use http and we will *NOT* use session authentication. That is,
>>>> there is no username/password for http sessions.
>>>>
>>>> - We will use username in the NSI message attribute. The username
>>>> should be "jrv at internet2.edu" (non case sensitive)
>>>>
>>>> Are these ok?
>>>>
>>>> Tomohiro
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 22:42:00 -0400
>>>> John MacAuley <john.macauley at surfnet.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> For the STP I prefer lowercase.
>>>>>
>>>>>> #1 urn:ogf:network:stp:Aruba:A1
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the correct nsa for Aruba.
>>>>>
>>>>>> #3 urn:ogf:network:nsa:Aruba-OpenNSA
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the John's mail, OpenDRAC returned:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry this was my mistake as I returned their real names instead of the pretend ones for the demo.  These were hardcoded in a test program.
>>>>>
>>>>> John.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2011-09-07, at 10:34 PM, Atsuko Takefusa wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> May I confirm the descriptions of NSA and STP?
>>>>>> It is really important to interoperate with the seven different
>>>>>> implementations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is the correct "stpId" description?
>>>>>> #1 urn:ogf:network:stp:Aruba:A1
>>>>>> #2 urn:ogf:network:STP:Aruba:A1
>>>>>> #3 other?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is the correct "requester/providerNSA" description?
>>>>>> #1 urn:ogf:network:nsa:Aruba
>>>>>> #2 urn:ogf:network:NSA:Aruba
>>>>>> #3 urn:ogf:network:nsa:Aruba-OpenNSA
>>>>>> #4 other?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the John's mail, OpenDRAC returned:
>>>>>> <requesterNSA>urn:ogf:network:nsa:ferb.surfnet.nl</requesterNSA>
>>>>>> <providerNSA>urn:ogf:network:nsa:phineas.surfnet.nl</providerNSA>
>>>>>> <sourceSTP>
>>>>>> <stpId>urn:ogf:network:stp:Aruba:Aiden</stpId>
>>>>>> </sourceSTP>
>>>>>> <destSTP>
>>>>>> <stpId>urn:ogf:network:stp:Aruba:Ashley</stpId>
>>>>>> </destSTP>
>>>>>> It will be modified at demo?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Atsuko
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2011/9/8 Jerry Sobieski <jerry at nordu.net>:
>>>>>>> Attendees-
>>>>>>> Jerry Sobieski (NORDUnet)
>>>>>>> Tomohiro Kudoh (AIST)
>>>>>>> Henrik Thostrup Jensen (NORDUnet)
>>>>>>> Jeroen van der Ham (UvA)
>>>>>>> Redek Krzywania (PSNC)
>>>>>>> Michal Balcerkiewicz (PSNC)
>>>>>>> John MacAuley (SURFnet)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Demo presentation at Venue
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - We have 5 monitors and desks in the demo space at the art museum.  We have
>>>>>>> a 90 minute formal demonstration presentation window Tuesday from 3:45pm to
>>>>>>> 5:15pm.   The rest of the time we expect to have access to the demo room for
>>>>>>> continued testing.
>>>>>>> ***AI:  Jerry:  Confirm with RNP that the room will be available Wed and Thu
>>>>>>> after the window as well as leading up to the demonstration window.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - The implementation teams are asked to continue interop testing and to
>>>>>>> capture log files as they run the Plugfest Challenge tests.  These log files
>>>>>>> can be annotated to show the protocol messaging.   And these annotated logs
>>>>>>> can be presented at the venue in the demo room in addition to the live runs,
>>>>>>> and/or as part of a short PPT from each implementation team.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - We want to make sure we have as many live runs prepared for the demo
>>>>>>> window as is practical.  But we do not expect all the Challenges to be ready
>>>>>>> or to be presented live.  The anotated logs can be used to complement the
>>>>>>> live runs.   We can allocate monitors as appropriate for the tests
>>>>>>> scenarios.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NSA Implementation Status
>>>>>>> I hope I summarized this close enough...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - OpenNSA (NORDUnet - Henrik)
>>>>>>>    - mostly all functional, self interoperable (Chal #1 works)
>>>>>>>    - encountering many interoperability issues within the MTL (WS* related
>>>>>>> issues)
>>>>>>>    - some testing with dynamicKL, but encountered some SOAP issues not sure
>>>>>>> how to resolve.
>>>>>>>    - Need some input from JM.
>>>>>>> - AutoBAHN
>>>>>>>    - FUnctional, have had some issue in an office move(?)
>>>>>>>    - Expect to begin interop testing very soon
>>>>>>>    - Need updated topology
>>>>>>>    - No WS issues experienced with dynKL
>>>>>>> - G-LAMBDA (AIST)
>>>>>>>    - Almost ready for interop test...
>>>>>>>    - some testing with G-LAMBDA KDDI Labs
>>>>>>>    - authentication is an outstanding issue
>>>>>>> - DRAC
>>>>>>>    - John is coding like a mad man.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *** Decided:  For Rio, we will not require session authentication between
>>>>>>> NSAs.  HTTP only.
>>>>>>>        For SC we *will require* conformant authentication, HTTPS.
>>>>>>> *** For Rio, service authorization will be basic user based authorization.
>>>>>>>        The user will be "jrv at internet2.edu".   Case in-sensitive.   This
>>>>>>> string my be authorized by the NSA however they wish, but all requests as
>>>>>>> part of the Plugfest will use this user credential.
>>>>>>> If the user is present, any/all service requests will be authorized.   If
>>>>>>> not present, or any other user is present, service requests will be denied.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Topology
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The current topology is the Rio Ring of 7 networks.  Version 1.1c is
>>>>>>> latest.   However, JM has proposed a modified topology to include "partOf"
>>>>>>> relations for STPs to indicate the NSnetwork object they belong to, and
>>>>>>> "managing" relation for NSA object to indicate which NSnetwork object they
>>>>>>> are responsible for.  This version also uses full URN specification to name
>>>>>>> NSnetowork objects and STP objects.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ***AI: Jerry:  JS will review the topo file asap and if no other issue are
>>>>>>> obvious, it will be circulated as topo version 1.1d.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/7/11 10:38 AM, Tomohiro Kudoh wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a resending of test message:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since the OGF NSI-WG mailing list is down, I made a temporary mailing
>>>>>>> list. Addresses on the Jerry's contact list are registered as well as
>>>>>>> Guy and Jeroen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tomohiro
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Atsuko Takefusa, Ph. D.
>>>>>> Information Technology Research Institute, AIST
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> nsi-wg mailing list
>>>>>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>>>>>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nsi-wg mailing list
>>>>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>>>>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

More information about the nsi-wg mailing list