Re: [forces] Requesting further comments/suggestions on IETF ForCESLogical Function Block (LFB) Subsidiary Management dratf

["[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>]

​Dear ​Mr. Chuanhuang,

Many thanks for your comments and support.

We are updating the draft now, and plan to address
the issues/concerns that you raise below in the next version.

Yes, we are adding additional details for the main scenarios
(recovery from FE and
​CE failures) , and plan to update the
nomenclatures per
your suggestions.


Thanks again.

Best.

Bhumip




On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Chuanhuang <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Dear Bhumip,
>
> I think this work is very meaningful, and the WG should push it forward.
>
> I have some comments:
> 1: This draft is mainly for the use of virtulization, and aims to
> standardize an
> LFB to support this virtulization.
>
> I think we cannot call the LFB as "FEM" directly. Because real FEM is a
> logical
> entity responsible for generic FE management tasks, generally, its
> functions
> are more abundant,such as the settings of TML protocol parameters and
> secure
> parameters. The functions of FEM are open and extensible.They are just not
> as
> you defined "The LFB is an LFB that standardizes and assists creation of
> NEs."
> So, i suggest we need rename the standard LFB as "FEVM (FE Virtulization
> Management) ".
> There is inheritance relationship between FEM LFB and FEVM LFB.
>
> 2: I think Section 3 (Potential Scenarios) should pay more attention to
> the FEVM
> role in these scenarios. For example, in Section 3.1, we need describe the
> FEVM role
> in the recovery process, rather than the recovery method by using
> virtulization of CEs.
>
> 3:In my thought, FEVM needn't know which VFEs are in one VNE(Virtual NE),
> it only
> need know the VFE informations in physical FEs. Is it more reasonable that
> CEM has
> the visiblity to all VNE.
> At the same time, The component "NE" of the LFB rename to "VNE" may be
> better.
>
>
> Yours,
> Chuanhuang
>
> ======== 2014-07-16 01:16:36  ========
>
> Dear All,
>
> We are planning to release updates to the LFB
> Subsidiary Management draft
> (
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-khs-forces-lfb-subsidiary-management/
> )
> very soon.
>
> Kindly let us know ASAP if you have any
> further comments/suggestions.
>
> Many thanks in advance.
>
> Best.
>
> Draft Authors
>
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Network Working Group                                      B. Khasnabish
> Internet-Draft                                              ZTE TX, Inc.
> Intended status: Standards Track                           E. Haleplidis
> Expires: August 14, 2014                            University of Patras
>                                                            J. Hadi Salim
>                                                        Mojatatu Networks
>                                                        February 10, 2014
>
>      IETF ForCES Logical Function Block (LFB) Subsidiary Management
>            draft-khs-forces-lfb-subsidiary-management-00.txt
>
> Abstract
>
>    This document discusses ForCES Logical Function Block (LFB)
>    Subsidiary Management (SM).  Note that LFB SM is useful for
>    introducing and supporting virtualization of ForCES Network Element
>    (NE) including control Element (CE) and Forwarding Element (FE).
>
> Status of This Memo
>
>    This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
>    provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
>
>    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
>    Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
>    working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
>    Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
>
>    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
>    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
>    time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
>    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
>
>    This Internet-Draft will expire on August 14, 2014.
>
> Copyright Notice
>
>    Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
>    document authors.  All rights reserved.
>
>    This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
>    Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
>    (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
>    publication of this document.  Please review these documents
>    carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
>    to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
>    include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
>
> Khasnabish, et al. Expires August 14, 2014 [Page 1]
> Internet-Draft IETF ForCES LFB Subsidiary Management February 2014
>
>    the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
>    described in the Simplified BSD License.
>
> Table of Contents
>
>    1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
>      1.1.  Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
>      1.2.  Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
>      1.3.  Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
>    2.  Use of Virtualized ForCES Elements  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
>      2.1.  Use of Virtualized CEs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
>      2.2.  Use of Virtualized FEs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>    3.  Potential Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>      3.1.  Recovery from CE failure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>      3.2.  Recovery from FE failure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>      3.3.  Load Balancing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>      3.4.  Scalable/Robust Service Function Chaining . . . . . . . .   6
>      3.5.  Orchestration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>      3.6.  Generic LFB Lifecycle Management  . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>        3.6.1.  Booting a CE/FE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>        3.6.2.  Bootstrapping the Configuration . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>        3.6.3.  Runtime Management  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>    4.  Testbed Platform  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>    5.  Reference Implementation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>    6.  FEM Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>      6.1.  Frame Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>      6.2.  Datatype Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>      6.3.  Metadata Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
>      6.4.  FEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
>        6.4.1.  Data Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
>        6.4.2.  Components  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
>        6.4.3.  Capabilities  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
>        6.4.4.  Events  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
>    7.  XML for FEM LFB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
>    8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
>    9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
>      9.1.  LFB Class Names and LFB Class Identifiers . . . . . . . .  13
>
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>