IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Teas-ns-dt] issue discussion: NF resource

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Thu, 28 May 2020 22:15 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6F653A0F5F for <teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2020 15:15:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3fWgE4uhlCJf for <teas-ns-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2020 15:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x235.google.com (mail-lj1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA1D93A0F5E for <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2020 15:15:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x235.google.com with SMTP id a25so134770ljp.3 for <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2020 15:15:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=yLGim1tWWIkzFD8D213f9awt81A0+D9njOBfoG5VHZ0=; b=m79zjKPDOtfOjcERqWaSiPZchOWR+o1WuyE2ramZlpMWKafAp9uoaGVsf94ZHUpqrA 5+2ACeeeJ5OqF7MXoktWgndNJfNH7HV5hdL6Vw6bZI32Kx6CgOmBXRKzlWD8VYI//WuR /NwdMEjkWyLJjD2VeGSDNFLKuY9mnxQsTwR8YSMHTniPAQU0GHUjGwknw0ufmidvddvc RqNO+Fj1tAtHUdc8KTl0Es8xltWDN5AQuEQ+Qne4qqzkWUHv+tMykmPzAN6dJj7V+bHH ONs3mI1E+MtTcBUZ8EEoF82KqFQ5paNzFY0xPtXUlojmdebwDuvOSzKjnIySbSW0UR6m GYww==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=yLGim1tWWIkzFD8D213f9awt81A0+D9njOBfoG5VHZ0=; b=CUA5X7aFwc3YmEnMBNZrzyxM2AzlfVfEXcQlp3hziXp1Hx/9ZU1SixxDJ+GePcU9t+ ANfL667YZCHONWcPXwEA9GM9XvKQWYSFDyQBoCN6m4h3VOTHmw+6wzDqFJsKiuzNBG7e fCdXjD0cZN/+HmqEdLmMPT011RHaVI5SO2aHkWGpznC8X6q0U1CtP2poz0MYuaZxs7Qh 4BVWNHUIomR2nkA7KP/Ir/CQD5GvF5HoDUjw0bC+ke53xRBQ8c7yKs7DOEIARqEFtkIV Jpaop4IvfxNHiwhCy5isvzY2dXEz0qb7FuFyR4bZRQhqak0ZQ+WGKvdxzeLdMUXvhst5 A6Sw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533wdrmnCZfl2VakbeBk39E1iUFw0OGvHkevtRwhEN499MII7OQ1 EPK2Dj6xcfWxLHiKyIWeBkLWLEJdgTIDoo/0mKo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxOWCxFnUP0AqcYaBVJApaYoT+OjQGL6fbnlnQeomA5ZzwOEmsG0QW1ZtzCd2F2n9itKmpYPmIfYKx1xH9Jikc=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:5446:: with SMTP id y6mr2582753ljd.8.1590704120931; Thu, 28 May 2020 15:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BYAPR13MB243703FF3232B71DEB810033D98E0@BYAPR13MB2437.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR13MB243703FF3232B71DEB810033D98E0@BYAPR13MB2437.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 15:15:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmUwMJRFKMRA-rpcZ=Zc3orgjUbQKt0xztWT0MZE2Vq-hg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kiran Makhijani <kiranm@futurewei.com>
Cc: "teas-ns-dt@ietf.org" <teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000122b5f05a6bcaa39"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas-ns-dt/SyP7nAI59zr_UAj5B7eEdoZDrtM>
Subject: Re: [Teas-ns-dt] issue discussion: NF resource
X-BeenThere: teas-ns-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TEAS Network Slicing Design Team <teas-ns-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas-ns-dt>, <mailto:teas-ns-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas-ns-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas-ns-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-ns-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas-ns-dt>, <mailto:teas-ns-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 22:15:25 -0000

Hi Kiran,
I think that an NF can be realized as a physical device or a VM. Would you
agree? If that is the case, then, in my opinion, we cannot consider only
the VNF case but add the PNF case as well.
Also, I don't see the real benefit to have NF, in all their variety now and
more in the future, as part of a TS. I think that NF is either part of the
TS implementation and thus is selected by an operator based on the SLO. Or
part of a service that uses the TS. In the model I have in mind, a client
of the TS does not specify which NFs should compose the TS but only what is
the functional behavior and performance provided by the TS.

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:06 PM Kiran Makhijani <kiranm@futurewei.com>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> To kick off discussion on this topic.
>
>
>
> During earlier discussions several of us asked for network functions
> should be part of the slices. For me the value of doing this is to be able
> to express different nuances of a service through single set of objectives.
> Then in NBI and implementation there is one controller to monitor the
> performance.
>
>
>
> At the entry and exit of transport slices, these NF can be supplied to
> enforce access control, policies, etc. on transport slice traffic. It is
> also safe to assume that they will be virtual.
>
>
>
> The objective is to apply those function on  traffic flows.
>
> 2 examples are  (1) use of firewall at entry point with the rules
> described by the user of transport slice. (2) Caching or DPI function on
> exit endpoints.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Kiran
>
>
> --
> Teas-ns-dt mailing list
> Teas-ns-dt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas-ns-dt
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email