Re: [sfc] PCEP Extensions for Service Function Chaining (SFC)

Thanks Joel, we can make text more clear in the next version if confusion is caused.

-Qin
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:jmh@joelhalpern.com] 
发送时间: 2016年11月26日 10:51
收件人: Qin Wu; sfc@ietf.org
抄送: BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN
主题: Re: [sfc] RE: PCEP Extensions for Service Function Chaining (SFC)

That sounds reasonable.  I was looking for some of that in the draft so as to evaluate the (likely sound) details.

Yours,
Joel

On 11/25/16 9:42 PM, Qin Wu wrote:
> Joel:
> The idea is when stateful PCE can be used to compute 
> traffic-engineered SFPs, SFP ID can also be predetermined. That is why we add SFP identifier TLV and send it back to classifier. This SFP Identifier received by Classifier can be inserted into NSH and used to select the path, invoke SF instance, identify next SFF.
> There may have other case when PCE only compute traffic-engineered 
> SFP, encode a full sequence of SFF/SF in the PCEP message, Classifier then allocate a SFP identifier, but how do we prevent other classifier assign the same SFP ID to another Service Function Path? Add SFP ID conflict detection mechanism is complicated.
>
> -Qin
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Xuxiaohu
> 发送时间: 2016年11月17日 17:07
> 收件人: Joel M. Halpern; Qin Wu; sfc@ietf.org
> 主题: 答复: [sfc] 答复: PCEP Extensions for Service Function Chaining (SFC)
>
> Hi Joel,
>
> The current version of this draft just describes neccessary PCEP extensions to realize the MPLS source routing based SFC approach as described in (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining-00). It doesn't touch the NSH-based SFC approach. I think it's Qin's draft that covers the NSH-based SFC approach.
>
> Best regards,
> Xiaohu
>
> ________________________________________
> 发件人: Joel M. Halpern [jmh@joelhalpern.com]
> 发送时间: 2016年11月17日 16:46
> 收件人: Xuxiaohu; Qin Wu; sfc@ietf.org
> 主题: Re: [sfc] 答复: PCEP Extensions for Service Function Chaining (SFC)
>
> Xu, it is unclear in this draft whether your intention is to carry NSH to support interoperation with other transports and carriage of metadata.
>
> Can you please clarify?
>
> Thank you,
> Joel
>
> On 11/17/16 2:42 AM, Xuxiaohu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> It's great to know that the PCE WG is now working on PCE Extensions 
>> for Service Function Chaining.
>>
>>
>>
>> The following is a draft about PCEP extensions for the MPLS source 
>> routing based SFC (see
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining-00):
>>
>>
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-pce-sr-sfc-03
>>
>>
>>
>> Any suggestions and comments are welcome as well.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Xiaohu
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -
>> --
>> *发件人:* sfc [sfc-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Qin Wu [bill.wu@huawei.com]
>> *发送时间:* 2016年11月17日 15:01
>> *收件人:* sfc@ietf.org
>> *主题:* [sfc] PCEP Extensions for Service Function Chaining (SFC)
>>
>> Hi, folks:
>>
>> Chair remind us recently to announce to this list that PCE WG is 
>> working on PCE Extension for Service Function Chaining. Here is the relevant draft:
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wu-pce-traffic-steering-sfc-09
>>
>> Please take a look at it and your comments and suggestions are welcome.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Qin
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sfc mailing list
>> sfc@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc
>>