Subject: [Nfvrg] Defining a Common Model for intent

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 16:01:55 -0400

On the post
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nfvrg/current/msg00208.html, I suggest
that any discussion about use cases or models for Intent needs to define
intent before examining use cases or models.  In the current forums
examining Intent (ODL NIC, ODL Nemo, OF NBI and Keystone, OPNFV Movie,
OpenStack) there is a realization that Intent occurs at multiple layers.
However, there is no clear definition or model across all these forums for
Intent. 

The authors of draft-xia-ibnemo-icim have created unified model for defining
intent across many layers, and ask feedback on the concepts in the draft.
The model suggest that:

1)      A user has a intent that is expressed in a context.

2)      Intent (usually) involves an object with a result, and optionally
includes operations toward that result. 

3)      Operations conditions perform actions within/modified by
constraints. 

We believe this defines clearly what others are calling "pure intent"
(objects + results) versus "constrained intent" (objects + operations +
constraints).   The draft can be found at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xia-ibnemo-icim/ .   We would
appreciate any feedback on this common information model for intent. 

Sue Hares 

[email-masked]