SDNRG Minutes
SDNRG Agenda IETF 92
Wednesday, July 22, 2015 (CEST)
9:00-11:30 Wednesday Morning session I
Location: Congress Hall II
================================================================
CHAIR(s): David Meyer <dmm@1-4-5.net>
Daniel King <d.king@lancaster.ac.uk>
AGENDA
1 Administriva
02 minutes
- Mailing
list: https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/sdn
- Web: https://datatracker.ietf.org/secr/proceedings/93/sdnrg
- Minutetaker & Scribe?
1.1 Agenda Bashing
01 minutes
Chairs
2. SDN Threat Analysis
12 minutes
Song
Haibin <haibin.song@huawei.com>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-0.pdf
[Yaakov Stein (YS)]:Timing
and order of message should be an issue for such threat, openflow
have such mechanisms;
[Dirk]: Much existing work, SDN security;
[？？]:Clarify the model of
SDN threat; Suggest to specify the component and terminology (from ONF?);
[Presenter]: just follow normal component &
terminologies, no new terminology introduced;
3. Protect and Secure SDN Controllers 12
minutes
Sandra
Scott-Hayward <s.scott-hayward@qub.ac.uk>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-1.pdf
Move the question onto the list…
4. SDN Trust Models and Implementation
Methodologies
12 minutes
Saurabh
Chattopadhyay <saurabhchattopadhya@hcl.com>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-2.pdf
[Yaakov Stein (YS)] another application can be
arranged by a user instead of an operator?
[Presenter] Both deployment possible, user-driven
demand;
[YS] End user may trust, but white-box layer may
cause disturbance of other existing trust model;
[Presenter] trust model user-application; it
depends on whether it is a dedicated model to application/user; quite many
scenarios, may need to specify which and reference point.
[YS] interesting,
offline;
[DiegoLopez] trust don’t
have 1-to-1 mapping, user-application trust model, cross-domain trust model,
etc., is it too wide? For WG level, I2NSF is now a BoF, should consider PKI
issue, in either RG draft or WG.
[Presenter] agree on pki
issue, will take this point;
[DanKing]As a research
group, people can propose scientific solutions;
5. Secure Authentication Model for SDN 12
minutes
Hosnieh
Rafiee <ietf@rozanak.com>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-3.pdf
No Questions.
6. SDN Attestation Approach
12 minutes
Ludovic
Jacquin <ludovic.jacquin@hp.com>
No Questions
7. SDN Dependability: Assessment, Techniques, and
Tools 12 minutes
Stenio
Fernandes <sflf@cin.ufpe.br>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-4.pdf
No Questions.
8. SDN Performance Monitoring 10 minutes
Klaus
Wehmuth <klaus@lncc.br>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-5.pdf
[YS]: Related with previous talk (on dependency)? These
monitoring stuffs are not anything new (especially consider NFV), monitoring on
the previous network is almost done (e.g. carrier network), what is new? Is
there a new problem?
[Presenter] that’s true, not new issue, may
consider integrated with API;
[YS]: we already have such work, for example on Ethernet;
9. Scalable Resilience for Software-Defined
Networking Using 10 minutes
Loop-Free
Alternates with Loop Detection
Michael
Menth <menth@uni-tuebingen.de>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-6.pdf
[? TID]：did
you putting more label? Can you avoid that?
[Presenter]: label is used to record failures, not
for routing;
[? TID]: examing id is
quite a load, why extra label?
[Presenter]: motivation is to increase the
coverage by loop-detection (and corresponding alternatives), may not be popular
in IP networks, offline;
[YS]: use TTL as alternative? In SDN how many hops
expect is known;
[Presenter]:
[Kostas Pentikousis(KP)]: how does that propagate in the network?
[Presenter]: not per flow, only per switch,
[KP]: no need to flood everywhere, offline.
10. SDN Network Coding
10 minutes
Frank
Fitzek <frank.fitzek@tu-dresden.de>
[Dean Bogdanovic (DB)]:
how it is different with P4 language?
[Presenter]: not familiar with P4;
[DB]: similar to P4, good to see comparison;
[KP]: How about wireless?
[Presenter]: you can refer to wireless, but everything
here currently are wired;
[KP]: do you have very low loss? Delay?
[Presenter]: depends on where the losses are, we
do some measurement; if you refer to multi-path with very dynamic bandwidth,
network coding helps you;
[KP]: I was referring to the previous docs, DC
network is rather fixed, have you looked up how that related into your problem?
[Presenter]: we prefer Random approach coz totally
distributed;
[KP] it likes previous approaches, with node
failures and link going down;
[Presenter]: we are not fixing the problem here, here
we just exploit multi-path;
11. Framework for large scale-SDN experiments via
Software Defined 10 minutes
Federated Infrastructures
Gino Carrozzo <g.carrozzo@nextworks.it>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-7.pdf
No Question Discussed; move to list;
12. Joint PC/D-NFV optimization
10 minutes
Yaakov
Stein <yaakov_s@rad.com>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-8.pdf
No Questions discussed on-site; move to list;
13. FreeSurf: Application-Centric Wireless Access
with SDN 10 minutes
Panagiotis Papadimitriou
<panagiotis.papadimitriou@ikt.uni-hannover.de>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-9.pdf
[?] why not virtulize everything, use vCPE,
then openflow can handle;
[Presenter] hopefully operators will work on this
and it can be handled;
14. Problem statement of SDN and NFV co-deployment
in cloud data centers 5 minutes
Gu Rong
<gurong_cmcc@outlook.com>
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-sdnrg-10.pdf
No Questions discussed on-site; move to the list;