Subject: [Dots] About modification of draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-18

From: H Y <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:33:12 -0400

Hi  dots-use-cases draft authors,

At my presentation at last DOTS WG meeting, Ben said that if I modify
the use case WG draft in 1 week, it is in time for the review process.
In accordance with it, I modified the use case WG draft.

I just appended the below sentence to 3.3. DDoS Orchestration of
draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-18. The modification was reviewed by Kaname
Nishizuka.

   In addition to the above DDoS Orchestration, the selected DDoS
   mitigation systems can return back a mitigation request to the
   orchestrator as an offloading.  When the DDoS attack becomes severe
   and the DDoS mitigation system's utilization rate reaches its maximum
   capacity, the DDoS mitigation system can send mitigation requests
   with additional hints such as its blocked traffic information to the
   orchestrator.  Then the orchestrator can take further actions like
   requesting forwarding nodes such as routers to filter the traffic.
   In this case, the DDoS mitigation system implements a DOTS client
   while the orchestrator implements a DOTS server.

How is this?

Thanks,
Yuhei

-- 
----------------------------------
Yuuhei HAYASHI
08065300884
[email-masked]
[email-masked]
----------------------------------

---

From: Töma Gavrichenkov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 23:07:49 +0300

Peace,

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:28 PM H Y <[email-masked]> wrote:
> draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-18.

IMO this, from the architectural point of view, is quite an obvious
use case which doesn't have a lot to do with orchestration itself,
because it is mostly covered (in a different set of words) in 3.1.

That being said, I'm personally fine with incorporating this into the
draft if Kaname believes this provides a better guidance for
implementers.

--
Töma

---

From: Daniel Migault <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:44:30 -0400

Hi,

If that text is believed to be clearer, I am fine with it. Anyone opposed
to the text ?
Yours,
Daniel

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 4:08 PM Töma Gavrichenkov <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Dots mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots
>

---

From: "Xialiang (Frank, Network Standard & Patent Dept)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 21:01:17 +0000

As one of the co-author,  I understand the added text clearly,  and am fine with it.

Thanks!

--------------------------------------------------
夏靓 Frank
Mobile: +86-13913840549<tel:+86-13913840549>/+86-18651800549<tel:+86-18651800549>
Email: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
发件人：Daniel Migault <[email-masked]>
收件人：Töma Gavrichenkov <[email-masked]>
抄 送：H Y <[email-masked]>;[email-masked] <[email-masked]>;dots <[email-masked]>
时间：2019-07-25 16:44:52
主 题：Re: [Dots] About modification of draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-18

Hi,

If that text is believed to be clearer, I am fine with it. Anyone opposed to the text ?
Yours,
Daniel

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 4:08 PM Töma Gavrichenkov <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
Peace,

--
Töma

_______________________________________________
Dots mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots

---

From: kaname nishizuka <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:51:33 +0900

Yes, I do believe.
I heard from Yuhei that this additional section stems from operator's needs, and also from view point of an implementer it is worth to be mentioned.
So I'm happy with including it.

thanks,
Kaname

---

From: Töma Gavrichenkov <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 00:59:05 +0300

Peace,

> So I'm happy with including it.

With that, and especially considering Daniel's input, I have to update
my previous feedback: I strongly encourage the draft authors to add
this to the draft.

--
Töma

---

From: H Y <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:28:33 -0400

Thank you very much :-)

Yuhei