Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can we go further? Look forward to your opinions.

<david.black@emc.com> Thu, 01 March 2012 17:02 UTC

Return-Path: <david.black@emc.com>
X-Original-To: sami@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sami@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513C321F8855 for <sami@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 09:02:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -109.722
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.722 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.877, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 3vOHlWOncViw for <sami@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 09:02:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1BB821F8875 for <sami@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 09:02:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si04.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI04.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.24]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q21H2a2s027657 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:02:37 -0500
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhub.lss.emc.com [10.254.222.129]) by hop04-l1d11-si04.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:02:21 -0500
Received: from mxhub30.corp.emc.com (mxhub30.corp.emc.com [128.222.70.170]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q21H2Kbr015914; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:02:20 -0500
Received: from mx14a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.157]) by mxhub30.corp.emc.com ([128.222.70.170]) with mapi; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:02:20 -0500
From: david.black@emc.com
To: melinda.shore@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 12:02:18 -0500
Thread-Topic: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can we go further? Look forward to your opinions.
Thread-Index: Acz3x+kNiL9BmUpjRKyFawblNZNp1wABImeA
Message-ID: <7C4DFCE962635144B8FAE8CA11D0BF1E05AEC8CCDE@MX14A.corp.emc.com>
References: <A27496C192613C44A82D819E1B98DB5721DAE9A6@SZXEML511-MBS.china.huawei.com> <201203011329.q21DTbkD023885@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <4F4F9DA3.5030901@gmail.com> <201203011613.q21GDAob025552@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <4F4FA2CA.9060205@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F4FA2CA.9060205@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EMM-MHVC: 1
Cc: sami@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can we go further? Look forward to your opinions.
X-BeenThere: sami@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: State Migration <sami.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sami>, <mailto:sami-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sami>
List-Post: <mailto:sami@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sami-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sami>, <mailto:sami-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 17:02:44 -0000

> > That does mean that an active VM in one place is migrated "live" (with
> > a short downtime of sub seconds) to another place.
> > This is not a case where the VM shuts down and new one is instantiated
> > (i.e., started from scratch) elsewhere.
> > Isn't this what VM migration means?
> 
> I think so, and there's no doubt it would be helpful to be clearer about
> that going forward.  However, my understanding that while the VM image
> would be moved (craploads of kernel state - file tables, page tables,
> all that crap), network activity would have to be quiesced first.  

That understanding is incorrect - network activity is not quiesced.  A
gratuitous ARP or RARP is issued after the migration, and some inbound
packets may get dropped because they are delivered only to the source
location of the migration.

Thanks,
--David


> -----Original Message-----
> From: sami-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sami-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Melinda Shore
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 11:25 AM
> To: Thomas Narten
> Cc: Yingjie Gu(yingjie); sami@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can we go further? Look forward to your
> opinions.
> 
> On 3/1/12 7:13 AM, Thomas Narten wrote:
> > That does mean that an active VM in one place is migrated "live" (with
> > a short downtime of sub seconds) to another place.
> > This is not a case where the VM shuts down and new one is instantiated
> > (i.e., started from scratch) elsewhere.
> > Isn't this what VM migration means?
> 
> I think so, and there's no doubt it would be helpful to be clearer about
> that going forward.  However, my understanding that while the VM image
> would be moved (craploads of kernel state - file tables, page tables,
> all that crap), network activity would have to be quiesced first.  It
> sounds to me like it's got much in common with old school supercomputer
> checkpoint/restart.  For whatever it's worth we have to do something
> similar with some mid-range "application availability" (you'll notice
> the absence of the word "high") gizmos, and something along the lines of
> a middlebox state migration tool would seem to have some applicability
> there, too.
> 
> Melinda
> _______________________________________________
> sami mailing list
> sami@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sami