Re: [sfc] Progression of use case documents in the SFC WG

[Jiangyuanlong <[e-mail]>]

What SDO does draft-kumar-sfc-dc-use-cases intend to target?
I see the introduction in the document:" Data centers -- enterprise, cloud or service provider -- deploy
   service nodes at various points in the network topology" which will overlap with many SDOs in scopes.

Thanks,
Yuanlong


-----Original Message-----
From: sfc [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Jim Guichard (jguichar)
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 1:25 AM
To: Joel M. Halpern; Zhen Cao
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [sfc] Progression of use case documents in the SFC WG

Thank you Joel. Yes, this is the approach we plan to take and I see a lot
of support for that on the list.

On 3/28/14, 11:03 AM, "Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>One aspect in the chairs proposal that struck me has particularly useful
>was keeping the use case document for specific partners separate.  That
>way, it is MUCH easier to liaise with 3GPP or the BBF on the aspects of
>the use cases that are important to them.
>
>Yours,
>Joel
>
>On 3/28/14, 4:34 AM, Zhen Cao wrote:
>> Dear Chairs,
>>
>> I do not know how we come to this conclusion given the below facts
>> 1) Email discussion on January,
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sfc/current/msg00966.html, with
>> many supports of moving forward the  document draft-liu-sfc-use-cases.
>>
>> 2) London discussion as per
>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/minutes/minutes-89-sfc , where
>> several people voice out that we need one document
>>
>> As for draft-liu-sfc-use-cases, I'd say it is not a simple 'general'
>> use cases write-up, actually it has already merged with one mobility
>> use case from Med, and it also describe the use cases from the
>> abstract point of view, i.e. two angles that try to summarize the
>> existing activities.
>>
>> Technically, one use cases document is much better for people both
>> inside and outside to understand the sfc activities better. The
>> draft-liu-sfc-use-cases serves this target very well. And many use
>> cases are basically the same according the chaining logic, why we need
>> so many...
>>
>> So based on previous discussion both on the list and f2f meeting,  I
>> am suggesting that we move forward the general document and consider
>> other documents in meanwhile as they turn out to be significant.
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> zhen cao
>> china mobile
>>
>>> That leaves: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-sfc-use-cases/,
>>>a
>>> more general document. But that document includes text on three topics
>>>that
>>> would be covered in more detail elsewhere (broadband, mobile, and DC).
>>>While
>>> this document could contain pointers to the other documents, that
>>>leaves the
>>> document with very little standalone content -- raising the question
>>>of what
>>> should be done with it, or what content it could incorporate in order
>>>to be
>>> worthwhile as a standalone document.
>>>
>>> Thus, the chairs recommendation at this time is:
>>>
>>> 1) Call for WG adoption of draft-haeffner-sfc-use-case-mobility-00.txt
>>>and
>>> draft-kumar-sfc-dc-use-cases-00.txt as WG documents (target:
>>>informational).
>>>
>>> 2) Defer action on draft-liu-service-chaining-use-cases  and
>>> draft-meng-sfc-broadband-usecases per the above discussion.
>>>
>>> Does this make sense?
>>>
>>> Jim & Thomas
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sfc mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sfc mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>sfc mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc

_______________________________________________
sfc mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc