Re: [lisp] updated draft-lisp for sdn-nfv
"Flinck, Hannu (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannu.flinck@nsn.com> Wed, 29 May 2013 14:08 UTC
Return-Path: <hannu.flinck@nsn.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6083C21F9206 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 May 2013 07:08:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.445
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.445 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_BELOW2=2.154, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AR11J9BuLhXc for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 May 2013 07:07:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B2D721F91A0 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 May 2013 07:07:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id r4TE7n6I005611 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 29 May 2013 16:07:49 +0200
Received: from DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.34]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id r4TE7lBF000601 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 29 May 2013 16:07:47 +0200
Received: from DEMUHTC005.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.36) by DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Wed, 29 May 2013 16:07:47 +0200
Received: from DEMUMBX011.nsn-intra.net ([169.254.11.104]) by DEMUHTC005.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.36]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Wed, 29 May 2013 16:07:46 +0200
From: "Flinck, Hannu (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannu.flinck@nsn.com>
To: ext Sharon Barkai <Sharon@Contextream.com>, "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: updated draft-lisp for sdn-nfv
Thread-Index: AQHOV2F1WwK+ZskB0UudtqvSeK+cEJkcNoZw
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 14:07:46 +0000
Message-ID: <29264E37AFF9384FAEBBC9C6CD32643405DFA0@DEMUMBX011.nsn-intra.net>
References: <C41A2BC8-57A5-4DEC-B1DB-4B711E080893@contextream.com>
In-Reply-To: <C41A2BC8-57A5-4DEC-B1DB-4B711E080893@contextream.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.159.42.98]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-size: 2570
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1369836469-000017BA-BB5E4995/0-0/0-0
Subject: Re: [lisp] updated draft-lisp for sdn-nfv
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lisp>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 14:08:03 -0000
Thank you Sharon and other authors I read this with great interest. I have some questions though to better understand how this would work: 1) in the figure on page 6 what is the "Distribution-Center B"? Do you mean Data-Center B? 2) why do you need to co-locate Control-Agents with the SDN-xTRs? 3) Section 5 page 7: what is meant by LISP overlay in this context? Or do you mean SDN-outerlay instead here? 4) Section 5 page 7: for the selection of the best suited VNF you seem to use quite dynamic attributes, e.g. "health-load attributes". This seems to indicate a push type of mapping system. The current LISP mapping system is pull based. And if I am not mistaken that was the design choice. 5) Section 5.1 maybe you clarify in the terminology section what is "Function-Instance-EID" and "Function_EID"? Are they same of different? 6) The text suggest that Mapping system (also) subscribes the SDN-xTR to the Function-Instance-EID and Function EID to receive updates. How are these updates, I believe "health-load" attributes, distributed to Control Agents of SDN-xTRs? Maybe a push based mapping system is required? How much overhead traffic that would generate? 7) Can you, please clarify in the terminology what is App-Instance-Record and how it differs from Function ID and Function-Instance-ID? Best regards Hannu -----Original Message----- From: lisp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lisp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Sharon Barkai Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 5:59 AM To: lisp@ietf.org Subject: [lisp] updated draft-lisp for sdn-nfv There is an updated draft-lisp for sdn scaling network function virtualization. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-barkai-lisp-nfv-01.txt The draft shows how LISP enhances SDN from (1) concentrated, (2) hop-by-hop, (3) push control model, to (1) distributed, (2) overlay, (3) pull-pub-sub model, able to perform dynamic mapping the right flows, in the right sequence, from mobile users, to elastic functions. Main additions to draft-01 by Vina clarify the terminology around LISP-SDN and the LISP messages, as well as explain the SDN-XTR flow-rule (exact and best match) affinity determination and forwarding model. It will be good if during the next wg meeting Dino and Fabio will further elaborate on the LISP-SDN use-cases and the SDN open-source platforms LISP is being inserted to. Additional explanations on why and how to enhance SDN with LISP can be found on the (2page) paper bellow:
- [lisp] updated draft-lisp for sdn-nfv Sharon Barkai
- Re: [lisp] updated draft-lisp for sdn-nfv Flinck, Hannu (NSN - FI/Espoo)