Re: [sop] [Sdnp] FW: New Non-WG Mailing List: sop -- Service Orchestration and Desciption for Cloud Services

Ping Pan <ping@pingpan.org> Thu, 16 February 2012 15:52 UTC

Return-Path: <ping@pingpan.org>
X-Original-To: sop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D244721F86D7 for <sop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:52:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Ar1emZqhbB0T for <sop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:52:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og107.obsmtp.com (exprod7og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.167]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 385F721F85C4 for <sop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:52:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com ([209.85.216.44]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob107.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTz0mKogTBf8CxCsDjnw3hr2Jp2QH3Vvm@postini.com; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:52:11 PST
Received: by qafi29 with SMTP id i29so4488332qaf.10 for <sop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:52:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.229.105.141 with SMTP id t13mr2034685qco.108.1329407529955; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:52:09 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.80.200 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:51:28 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <618BE8B40039924EB9AED233D4A09C5103001E8E@XMB-BGL-416.cisco.com>
References: <CB62CCB4.C846D%mmorrow@cisco.com> <470D91CE-5D54-48F8-8889-438DA873A3FA@lucidvision.com> <618BE8B40039924EB9AED233D4A09C5103001E76@XMB-BGL-416.cisco.com> <CAHEV9L3EiCHutLEYHTCbPc0b439k_47mda1y1ONmwthKrQMiYw@mail.gmail.com> <618BE8B40039924EB9AED233D4A09C5103001E8E@XMB-BGL-416.cisco.com>
From: Ping Pan <ping@pingpan.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:51:28 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHEV9L0wgfFt_j6JPgb36vRSj0-LF3bS+NjUuKcTyKwoeVq3Sg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Ashish Dalela (adalela)" <adalela@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00235429cfac95b22004b916cf4a
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnSfqmFrgjMZTCW6WzxfvBaEvRSwRl4Y5e48TL6M4AqttSh4xQPU0pMM/CL8cYn145n1wLA
Cc: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>, "Monique Morrow \(mmorrow\)" <mmorrow@cisco.com>, sop@ietf.org, robert@raszuk.net, sdnp <sdnp@lucidvision.com>
Subject: Re: [sop] [Sdnp] FW: New Non-WG Mailing List: sop -- Service Orchestration and Desciption for Cloud Services
X-BeenThere: sop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Service Orchestration and Desciption for Cloud Services <sop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sop>, <mailto:sop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sop>
List-Post: <mailto:sop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sop>, <mailto:sop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:52:16 -0000

There are talks on more control from applications to the networks.

IMHO, this is more of a misunderstanding than anything else.

First, many DC operators have leased the circuits or built the network.
They have every right to decide the policy at edge and aggregate traffic
onto the network they lease or own. Second, I think that the service
providers would have no problem to expedite the BW provisioning process
when a customer is asking for more, but no service provider to my best
knowledge would allow the customers to alter the routes inside their
networks.

So deep-control to me means a cleaner, simpler and faster way to
provisioning network resources through a consistent interface.

Ping

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Ashish Dalela (adalela)
<adalela@cisco.com>wrote:

> ** **
>
> Well, yes, one of the use-case is to solve interoperability issues between
> and across clouds.****
>
> ** **
>
> I also have heard from folks the need for “deep control” in which a
> customer outside the cloud wants to tweak or control the infrastructure or
> application at a low granularity. I think that would be hard, although not
> impossible, if the mechanisms outside and inside were different – as you
> will have to create mappings.****
>
> ** **
>
> That is a topic quite open for discussion.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks, Ashish****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Ping Pan [mailto:ping@pingpan.org]
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:54 PM
> *To:* Ashish Dalela (adalela)
> *Cc:* Thomas Nadeau; Monique Morrow (mmorrow); sdnp; sop@ietf.org;
> robert@raszuk.net
> *Subject:* Re: [sop] [Sdnp] FW: New Non-WG Mailing List: sop -- Service
> Orchestration and Desciption for Cloud Services****
>
> ** **
>
> Yeah, I have read all the drafts during the DC BoF discussion. In general,
> this makes sense...****
>
> ** **
>
> My thinking is that we may not want to standardize the interior DC
> management, as each vendor has own solution. But at the same time, we need
> to enable applications and services to ride on top of DC resources. In
> other words, SDN is in the position to enable Virtual DC's, and create the
> interface to communicate with networking resources at abstraction level.
> SDN should not be viewed as the NMS for DC's.****
>
> ** **
>
> There are a lot of work to be done here, and many parts are moving. Let's
> work together.****
>
> ** **
>
> Ping****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Ashish Dalela (adalela) <
> adalela@cisco.com>; wrote:****
>
>  ****
>
> SOP has the following main goals – ****
>
>  ****
>
> 1.  Fix interoperability issues with cloud services today. Main examples
> are inter-cloud, hybrid-cloud, and multi-vendor cloud. All cloud services
> are being enabled through proprietary APIs today, which don’t interoperate.
> To interoperate across vendors, providers and customers, we need an open
> standard. Ability to go across administrative domains is a basic
> requirement.****
>
>  ****
>
> 2.  A clear separation between service-independent and service-dependent
> pieces in cloud services. SOP is about service-independent pieces. Using
> SOP, a variety of services could be accessed or advertized. Separation
> between service-independent and service-dependent pieces makes the scheme
> extensible to any type of service – current or future.****
>
>  ****
>
> 3.  Create a common scheme for service orchestration that can be used
> across compute, network, storage, security, applications, etc. A common set
> of constructs that can be applied to any service type whether it is
> infrastructure or application.****
>
>  ****
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dalela-orchestration-00****
>
>  ****
>
> The above draft describes the problems SOP is aimed to address. This is
> the “requirements” draft.****
>
>  ****
>
> The other drafts are:****
>
>  ****
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dalela-sop-architecture-00 - describes
> the use-cases and network deployments with the protocol****
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dalela-sop-00 - describes the protocol’s
> messages ****
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dalela-sdf-00 - describes service
> naming, workflow construction, etc.****
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dalela-sop-flows-00 - describes some
> message flows****
>
>  ****
>
> Thanks, Ashish****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* Thomas Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@lucidvision.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 16, 2012 7:59 PM
> *To:* Monique Morrow (mmorrow)
> *Cc:* Ping Pan; robert@raszuk.net; sdnp; sop@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Sdnp] FW: New Non-WG Mailing List: sop -- Service
> Orchestration and Desciption for Cloud Services****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
>             Can you please explain what the purpose of SOP is and what its
> goals are?****
>
> People on this list have been also asking how it differs from SDN(p), so it
> ****
>
> might be helpful to include that as well. 8)****
>
>             ****
>
>             --Tom****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> On Feb 16, 2012, at 9:09 AM, Monique Morrow wrote:****
>
> ** **
>
> Guys
>
> Please join the SOP mailer
>
>
> List address: *sop@ietf.org
> *Archive: *http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sop/
> *To subscribe: *https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sop
> *
>
> TIA
>
> Monique
>
>
> On 2/14/12 10:45 PM, "Ping Pan" <ping@pingpan.org>; wrote:
>
> ****
>
> Where does OpenStack Quantum fit?
>
> OpenStack Quantum is to have agents in controllers and networking devices
> for the purpose of better transport. This is well within the goal of SDN.
>
> Ping
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>; wrote:*
> ***
>
>
> Actually I think those are quite separate problem spaces.
>
> SOP aim to address the requirement of cloud to cloud communication (hybrid
> or multi-domain). The way I think about this is how to standardize and
> synchronize OpenStack to OpenStack instrumentation signaling. The next step
> would be to actually also provide cloud to cloud communication layer.
> Simple example: How to launch N VMs in various data centers to be part of
> common resources for customer X.
>
> On the contrary SDNx seems to me of totally different caliber. One way to
> look at this is what and how we could use APIs exposed by existing network
> control planes to define and accomplish new network services. I quite do
> not see current network element control planes nor their APIs as much
> relevant to cloud services.
>
> My own personal view ;)
>
> Regards,
> R.
>
>
> ****
>
> I'd like to get some clarification (from anyone who might know or
> have an opinion) on how this would interact with/be distinct from any
> of the SDNP (or whatever name we decide upon) proposed work. Is this
> duplication/people striking out on their own from the nascent SDNP
> effort, a companion effort that became clear as we have begun
> segmenting the problem space, or something else entirely? Since this
> is the first I've heard of the list, I'm thinking it's a separate
> effort, but I figured I would raise the topic for discussion.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Wes George
>
> -----Original Message----- From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org
> [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org <ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org>; <
> mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org <ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org>>; ]
> On Behalf Of IETF
> Secretariat Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 2:25 PM To: IETF
> Announcement list Cc: sop@ietf.org; Monique Morrow Subject: New
> Non-WG Mailing List: sop -- Service Orchestration and Desciption for
> Cloud Services
>
>
>
> A new IETF non-working group email list has been created.
>
> List address: sop@ietf.org Archive:
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sop/ <
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sop/>  To subscribe:
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sop <
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sop>
>
> Purpose: Cloud services need to interoperate across cloud providers,
> service vendors and private/public domains. To enable this
> interoperability, there is need for a standard wire-format for
> exchanging service information. This mailing lists is for discussing
> protocols, data formats and server descriptions formats that allow
> cloud services to be discovered and used across private and public
> domains. Using these, it would be possible to interoperate diverse
> APIs and cloud services across service providers, service vendors and
> service users.
>
> For additional information, please contact the list administrators.
> _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing
> list IETF-Announce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce <
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>
>
> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
> proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or
> subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it
> is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail,
> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
> copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and
> attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify
> the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any
> copy of this E-mail and any printout.
> _______________________________________________ SDNP mailing list
> SDNP@lucidvision.com http://lucidvision.com/mailman/listinfo/sdnp <
> http://lucidvision.com/mailman/listinfo/sdnp> ****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SDNP mailing list
> SDNP@lucidvision.com
> http://lucidvision.com/mailman/listinfo/sdnp <
> http://lucidvision.com/mailman/listinfo/sdnp> ****
>
>  ****
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> SDNP mailing list
> SDNP@lucidvision.com
> http://lucidvision.com/mailman/listinfo/sdnp****
>
> _______________________________________________
> SDNP mailing list
> SDNP@lucidvision.com
> http://lucidvision.com/mailman/listinfo/sdnp****
>
>  ****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sop mailing list
> sop@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sop****
>
> ** **
>