Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can we go further? Look forward to your opinions.
Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> Thu, 01 March 2012 16:02 UTC
Return-Path: <melinda.shore@gmail.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 AF09721E805B for <sami@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 08:02:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 H2xF-1YQVZDT for <sami@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 08:02:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pw0-f44.google.com (mail-pw0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37F9F21F8B67 for <sami@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 08:02:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by pbcwz17 with SMTP id wz17so1076768pbc.31 for <sami@ietf.org>; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 08:02:47 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of melinda.shore@gmail.com designates 10.68.208.196 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.68.208.196;
Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of melinda.shore@gmail.com designates 10.68.208.196 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=melinda.shore@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=melinda.shore@gmail.com
Received: from mr.google.com ([10.68.208.196]) by 10.68.208.196 with SMTP id mg4mr4354957pbc.108.1330617767100 (num_hops = 1); Thu, 01 Mar 2012 08:02:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zWcqLwRC5rTg0zfEX5ayQfqxQCtoKyXIc7VpC0+zwDU=; b=gcuX/ofsAU6QnYdeZo4/w6R8iDzbCB/92SNFQ4FaXkC3VF6t4MJ1bgsBcKzN8v2EpJ dx/seNI+dHWBj31CYoPWiubIYHFbBu30QKERmYJMEIaz51oDuuIQKB4T8p72QPCpzImR 66p8B+ibPOVdWks+r3Akmug4TB8CaOIl7q1g0=
Received: by 10.68.208.196 with SMTP id mg4mr3672609pbc.108.1330617767068; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 08:02:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from polypro.local (66-230-83-192-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [66.230.83.192]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f3sm2387241pbr.61.2012.03.01.08.02.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 01 Mar 2012 08:02:46 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4F4F9DA3.5030901@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 07:02:43 -0900
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.27) Gecko/20120216 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.19
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
References: <A27496C192613C44A82D819E1B98DB5721DAE9A6@SZXEML511-MBS.china.huawei.com> <201203011329.q21DTbkD023885@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <201203011329.q21DTbkD023885@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Yingjie Gu(yingjie)" <guyingjie@huawei.com>, "sami@ietf.org" <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 16:02:47 -0000
On 3/1/12 4:29 AM, Thomas Narten wrote: > I would expect pretty much everyone on this list would agree that VM > migration takes place, under a wide range of conditions. So let's just > take it as a given that VM migration exists. Actually, it wasn't that long ago that that question was contested. I was trying to get a handle on this last year and asked a few hypervisor vendors, and the answers I got ranged from "no" to "we're migrating VMs but they need to be quiesced before they can move" to "we're doing it in real-time but aren't close to releasing a product." So, if you're treating it as a given that's something of a shift right there. Clearly any use case needs to be rooted in actual use, but this is a fast-moving area and while something that was true yesterday is probably true today, something that was true six months ago could very well no longer be. Melinda
- [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can we g… Yingjie Gu(yingjie)
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … Thomas Narten
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … Melinda Shore
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … Thomas Narten
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … Melinda Shore
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … Thomas Narten
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … david.black
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … zhangyunfei
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … Benson Schliesser
- [sami] 答复: First SAMI email in the new year, can … Dacheng Zhang(Dacheng)
- [sami] 答复: First SAMI email in the new year, can … Dacheng Zhang(Dacheng)
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … david.black
- Re: [sami] First SAMI email in the new year, can … Melinda Shore
- Re: [sami] 答复: First SAMI email in the new year, … Juergen Schoenwaelder
- [sami] 答复: Re: First SAMI email in the new year, … Yingjie Gu(yingjie)