Re: [sfc] comments on draft-quinn-sfc-problem-statement-02

Hi Jamal,
Please can you work with the editors of the problem statement to discuss your suggested changes and requirements.. Many thanks for you inputs.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 3, 2014, at 10:45 AM, "Jamal Hadi Salim" <hadi@mojatatu.com> wrote:
> 
> Jim,
> Finally getting back to this (I am at the meeting as i type this); here are some
> suggestions, section 3 - bullet #4:
> 
> ---------
>> Dataplane Metadata: Data plane metadata provides the ability to
>> exchange information between the network and service functions,
>> between service functions, and service functions and the network.
>> Metadata can include the result of antecedent classification,
>> information from external sources or forwarding related data.
>> For example, service functions utilize metadata, as required, for
>> localized policy decisions.
> 
> to:
> 
>> Dataplane Metadata: Data plane metadata provides the ability to
>> exchange information between the network and service functions,
>> between service functions, and service functions and the network.
>> Metadata can include the result of antecedent classification,
>> information from external sources or forwarding related data.
>> For example, service functions utilize metadata, as required, for
>> localized policy decisions
> or global (across service chain) pipeline stage processing indices.
> 
> YMMV, I feel it may require more text as to what is meant as "pipeline
> stage processing index".
> 
> The one more requirement we have may be more solution space on achieving
> pipeline indexing, but could fit in the problem statement, to be specific:
> we have a requirement to be able pass arbitrary metadata between
> nodes (means desire to have more than just basic 32/64 bit constructs).
> 
> It may mean adding one or two more sentences above.
> Thoughts?
> 
> cheers,
> jamal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Jim Guichard (jguichar)
> <jguichar@cisco.com> wrote:
>> Hi Jamal,
>> 
>> Thanks for this input. Comments inline.
>> 
>>> On 1/14/14 6:16 AM, "Jamal Hadi Salim" <hadi@mojatatu.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Some context:
>>> ForCES is defining what is known as the inter-FE LFB
>>> (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-joachimpillai-forces-interfelfb-03)
>>> to describe chaining of network functions.
>>> 
>>> One of the desires ForCES has is for horizontal scaling of
>>> network functions/service.
>>> We would like to take a network function or service and split
>>> its parts across several processing resources. This requires to
>>> pass around relevant "Pipeline stage indices"
>>> Brad McConnell did touch on it here (slide 6):
>>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-nsc-6.pdf
>>> 
>>> This view is missing from the problem space.
>> 
>> Jim> I agree. Do you have suggested text that can be reviewed and
>> discussed further?
>> 
>>> 
>>> Additionally - we have a requirement to be able pass arbitrary
>>> metadata between nodes (means desire to have more than just
>>> basic 32/64 bit constructs)
>> 
>> Jim> I think this is an area that will require some discussion as part of
>> the SFC architecture. The problem statement has no "solution" text and
>> simply states that metadata between the network and SF's, and between
>> SF's, is needed. The format of that metadata should be discussed outside
>> of the problem statement.
>> 
>>> 
>>> cheers,
>>> jamal
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sfc mailing list
>>> sfc@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc
>> 