IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sami] Bringing new work into the IETF

Benson Schliesser <bschlies@cisco.com> Mon, 22 August 2011 15:34 UTC

Return-Path: <bschlies@cisco.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 C13BC21F8B73 for <sami@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.309
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.309 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.710, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 nJJRQtntgrEx for <sami@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3D1721F8B6E for <sami@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:34:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=bschlies@cisco.com; l=1320; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1314027360; x=1315236960; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+d4zzfwNVf0TBwm0EFokQPotJs3xVyUV9MXT2nLS9BQ=; b=m/dHYo42Dwpl/TcAm6kDLaNfwojp0biVCJrfhGVdffDZZUzNQ4lbBFDE Qpb7Q2D8vH0O5rd7RbUQ9fiodgK01pJRuU6tcJImkcwOO4oFSO0K3LMbm hFa2kNOeH2Ize0OUOJXQ18E86/FWQ/lgbK30/v/YhaX8OhxUuWIesipRK s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABd3Uk6tJV2b/2dsb2JhbABBqAt3gUABAQEBAxIBJwIBKhISAQgYgQUBAQQBDQUih1OWdgGeO4ZIBIdgizSFFYwA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,263,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="15338356"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Aug 2011 15:35:49 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com [72.163.62.138]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7MFZmBC014947; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:35:48 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-206.cisco.com ([72.163.62.213]) by xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:35:48 -0500
Received: from 10.21.65.250 ([10.21.65.250]) by XMB-RCD-206.cisco.com ([72.163.62.213]) via Exchange Front-End Server email.cisco.com ([171.70.151.174]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:35:48 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:35:44 -0500
From: Benson Schliesser <bschlies@cisco.com>
To: "So, Ning" <ning.so@verizon.com>, Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <CA77E180.13DD5%bschlies@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [sami] Bringing new work into the IETF
Thread-Index: AcxgxormVlgBbhKlQ4yaQ7iW18rKdQACX3wAAARHw8Y=
In-Reply-To: <6665BC1FEA04AB47B1F75FA641C43BC0814DBCB1@FHDP1LUMXC7V41.us.one.verizon.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2011 15:35:48.0627 (UTC) FILETIME=[2AA50E30:01CC60E1]
Cc: "sami@ietf.org" <sami@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sami] Bringing new work into the IETF
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: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:34:55 -0000

Hi, Ning.

On 8/22/11 8:52 AM, "So, Ning" <ning.so@verizon.com> wrote:
>> Thomas Narten said:
> Are you saying you want interoperabilty between hypervisors? That is, You want
> to be able to move a VM from hypervisor type A (i.e, from vendor A) to a
> hypervisor of type B (i.e,. from Vendor B), and you'd like the IETF to develop
> standards that allow this?
> 
> [Ning]:  Yes. 
> ...
> [Ning]:  It is important to have a common agreement on requirements.  I stated
> my opinion and use case.  I will reach out to the carriers I have been work
> with in other areas to see if they also have the similar requirements.  If it
> is true, then IETF has to play a key role in this.  Other SDO such as DMTF
> will also play a key role.  I hope the use cases and requirements can drive
> player agreement/participation, especially secondary players.

It's good that you mention the DMTF.  You should also investigate other
groups such as ODCA (http://www.opendatacenteralliance.org/), which has a
working group on this topic.

Assuming that hypervisor compatibility, control APIs, etc, are worked out in
a different forum - what role do you think the IETF has in this space?  I
have my own thoughts on this topic, but I don't want to put words in your
mouth. Can you be specific?

Thanks,
-Benson

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email