Re: [Teas] SFC and slicing

Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com> Wed, 26 May 2021 15:58 UTC

Return-Path: <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24DEE3A00D9 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 May 2021 08:58:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.797
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.797 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DC_PNG_UNO_LARGO=0.001, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.698, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.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 Y3ULMu5Iv6z2 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 May 2021 08:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR02-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr10044.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.1.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BB293A00B2 for <teas@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 May 2021 08:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=JRFSnIIzE4BwEJdI4AKZfH7kh2xNJzWmfYZHKSW4KvHZ6nNZUiQ2lEcpcSiVZkyqxkAOV/gMdn4M5CdJtjEtwGNu4fsXVWJzpJa6O7vGoUdBCDvOwTdToL0mAt/+PDLm3Y5TWA/LRuQ16Tl2KdlhvcrrmvyrGtx+14hhbMSvZlraPuhcANWiiMrBThHhIZjOx3FTLUThn614OYAV7feLJRZ+nRKMPf8MHvyuma6d2csBCLC8c+0sxdj8x+Mws75CWBdAQuMhqmLClBZGpD69O7sMVdi21uD78bb+RLQFtBIp2kLpkUn0580qM40XIC6qD5s2eeuGV1AMWHO4MMpR4Q==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=tM6KfXIKX86Sreemit/AS8UPt3AFdDeNEJpPrivNNy8=; b=Ar7AR2ZmlnGZynJppYFUJqk0xK5y1YWDb3YQiUpRPfVr+ymXSZBg+TAnG2DbaCXkn893ei/xWzPPk8e2lP9L0HXqsH9HXMNvNGYm+Z0IAjFNZMks7Wmt/5Kya7VqW6cFbUT6WiY9D1c+yohVQ+jfJELmUxD40e3yJt5ZEgW58ixr69e+XHL1+Y4HwpIoCmszpFTIYOKjoM9h2JW5qfDGfSZ8E+kPF/pAfMD2IOFqzpYz4QzmXafm4OQ4IipaoEPvPDumh7x2eg4JQ2v1q8JX1aPmwbvC0f9TtvGeOEok7N6zJmXhyUoZMs1mfZ3gp12QswVeWCDuqYe5gJe/1PpZfA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=tM6KfXIKX86Sreemit/AS8UPt3AFdDeNEJpPrivNNy8=; b=n3KGjEg7M4VCs3/IxmhPv164EYJlfhuazIPKOUDEJHeEQcjFpsBr6cyJsZFn/r3dvO6sORHo2jeg9AKhCFq1/eysUA6MSNaCqsCgw70cG1VooPF4cX/YujFDStRMs+ubub8eJsBr9zgxOyfTwLKLturoHKzRb/XhwlyI21wmzRo=
Received: from AM8PR07MB8295.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:20b:32a::18) by AM8PR07MB8246.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:20b:325::17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4108.8; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:58:21 +0000
Received: from AM8PR07MB8295.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::9447:d6fe:f718:662d]) by AM8PR07MB8295.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::9447:d6fe:f718:662d%7]) with mapi id 15.20.4173.016; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:58:21 +0000
From: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
To: Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin=40yahoo.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Thread-Topic: [Teas] SFC and slicing
Thread-Index: AddP+Cy6X925jH4bRLG91y3U0kEFmAAnGEH+AAGoLAAABAokAABmtVqA
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 15:58:21 +0000
Message-ID: <AM8PR07MB829560174D105F7E48CE3E12F0249@AM8PR07MB8295.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <006e01d74ffa$aec567b0$0c503710$@olddog.co.uk> <MN2PR15MB3454AF3E8DF6856B28F642F6A0269@MN2PR15MB3454.namprd15.prod.outlook.com> <011101d7509b$2fa58a90$8ef09fb0$@olddog.co.uk> <2071994812.1094145.1621867486287@mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <2071994812.1094145.1621867486287@mail.yahoo.com>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: dmarc.ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc.ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [151.81.60.76]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 59aa132e-918e-4a56-4467-08d9205f1602
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM8PR07MB8246:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <AM8PR07MB8246C00E508025A22D1552C9F0249@AM8PR07MB8246.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:6430;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:AM8PR07MB8295.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(346002)(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(376002)(366004)(71200400001)(66616009)(38100700002)(186003)(26005)(66476007)(6506007)(76116006)(66556008)(83380400001)(86362001)(66946007)(53546011)(99936003)(66446008)(55016002)(110136005)(316002)(5660300002)(166002)(9686003)(33656002)(2906002)(7696005)(64756008)(52536014)(8676002)(45080400002)(44832011)(8936002)(966005)(122000001)(478600001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: =?utf-8?B?YW9uTVNwYVRyNitpRTJkS2MyZk4xYUJjQmNsU1h4Wk5DUTlrZ2J1bGtrUCtX?= =?utf-8?B?Q2doYk9rSGsxYkxLZzNBZ2pEbWhaRHdyK1RMMU9kZnVGNmRPSFlURVpUaGs4?= =?utf-8?B?MzRkM2haWSt1eUU2NGZxb0YvdWdXNklwOU8venhsMjRnRTZuOW1QaHFNQmt5?= =?utf-8?B?d2hFdFdyZkdoRSsvN0NnaFh4VmQ5SHV4ZjZsRFlsbHVDcW9yS012dzNBTEVX?= =?utf-8?B?eVBwUGpKb0MyVitPU2hEeFltc3oxTDAxN0JiUHJPRVVXZGFvVy9yWXBEenI2?= =?utf-8?B?d3RtbWswWklQbGtCcWRETkl6MERXRUJ1MmJPWmdZK3NrWDJ5WU56S2l5TFZv?= =?utf-8?B?Q1VtYXN0V0FOeW5IUEQwUCtPdThpb2JkK3pHVDdNQUxXWm13aFF2YkdJTkdG?= =?utf-8?B?ZGU1NWZHWWVyT21ZTUJPc1lwYTBFSEIzbUpEZHhHWTNWNnIzc0VpRWRsbmQ3?= =?utf-8?B?SWUwUnJpYnJvR2pyMlVYQXdXODRyai9LbEk3VzRJZzVYS2EwVTBWK0wrWUtC?= =?utf-8?B?Sk5hTGJ2ODRnbVc1aFExQ1F0SGtZNEFzbzRCcXBrSkZab0xIZGN3aCtacVZP?= =?utf-8?B?VkZDS0pZZHJpekFoVnFCbCt0QkNTVVphZFpIeGsvR3JkV0xzWUdPQ01yTE0z?= =?utf-8?B?SUkwSENzTzBqd0JUR2ZQV3djNFhrTndHU2Nzc3AwWCtUcjBJNzNjNGJHTWFv?= =?utf-8?B?RE93WmE4aitoWWNNV3dyWW9sbjlQc2t2M0NhL1VBQzFxSmt1R09OMThGaWht?= =?utf-8?B?K3dQUSt4eDRVNEx3b3E2SVFGWUxVOXBVaktKUHB1WXlYZXlTdnJoWUQ4ZHZD?= =?utf-8?B?Q3ZTQWJTQ3NlR2xvUWhLdC8rZStWUGpDdnJ6U1hEVHpCTjFITXU2Qjd4cVUz?= =?utf-8?B?UDZldHJ6eUhJcit4VERkSWlrRzE2OS8wMGVBWlhrOGwycWJ2Zi91RGpoQVFX?= =?utf-8?B?Y2pSc05iWXliYkQvekZzQ3lNMkFJRWRBdFhXVTNmV2YrQWRpVnpuaTM4Unpl?= =?utf-8?B?RjhLb0JKY3Q3bkFSdXdrTlN4VUVpZVFUMCszT2xoWnFZcS9ENndtUUtuT1U4?= =?utf-8?B?YXNxQXA3S1EydFluM0w1VEgzZ1IrQ29TQ0Fuc3ZWMmd6YmVBbk1BNUI0OTAw?= =?utf-8?B?SFBFK1ZwUVFVVERyaUJNRWxXRnU3SWNDZy9vTnEvVG1FMzRjWDRwTHNtbUJp?= =?utf-8?B?aFpUSTZORkhxWVUvRFVzZC9oVVIyM0dXazRoaHp1YmhyY1pYYjNuUWJlaVBL?= =?utf-8?B?ZEZwTDdmNmJZeFJJQjdWSFprc2NROEFwcjVaSUtHa1pDWTVxQWhpSDA1S0Rr?= =?utf-8?B?K00wZkM5cXQ2TDZCYmxOVnFZcURyekFFL1FKSkM1U0hRUWJEVlVZWUVyV3R1?= =?utf-8?B?Z3hrUC9KN3hZMXpqaUYwZWNaNVpRcWFGd3FKNjJTNlA1NUNNeU9qcmY0Q09D?= =?utf-8?B?WHBmckY2MVBEenhnRTdCWVVkbjQ5WVJ5R0luUi9lK2VIakU3WERkK0lGRVBS?= =?utf-8?B?alA1MXRoQ2c1Z2JsREgxcmxwWVZSb01kNFlhT2pXeXVKNFBWdkFpNjBpM1R0?= =?utf-8?B?WXJsTGpINzhLTnJhTUVwS2g0QnFkQlFpelRqeUxRZnVjMjF6clFvSmJGSkd5?= =?utf-8?B?ekdUWkRBVWdPYklwaHl2ZE8reW1zdDJSVVNPcHU0Ry83T0tuazBBR1pHVkxt?= =?utf-8?B?bFFmdGZib0xBL2lybnJ1b05FZGpXVnRBK2dpTEpRRWdybU0rdUpValhZVnRN?= =?utf-8?Q?aLiYU+PbgrgKRtyPzE=3D?=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_AM8PR07MB829560174D105F7E48CE3E12F0249AM8PR07MB8295eurp_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: AM8PR07MB8295.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 59aa132e-918e-4a56-4467-08d9205f1602
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 May 2021 15:58:21.2198 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: FeVvgprfdby5CE+1g6rfqHwgm3nLZqF/Uwvotu3vOnGxJHTasF4LIEIe57FrtD3IZCiKF67c4JU1Zrjf8J/bmWX25jDy4pNprlxaf5Xxpj0=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM8PR07MB8246
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/1yI6xpVPtDK9I0oe3qiG1GkGVcs>
Subject: Re: [Teas] SFC and slicing
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 15:58:30 -0000

Hi Adrian, Igor,

I was trying to think where this augmented (meaning: connectivity + service functions) model would be used.

The architecture that seems to be the most widely adopted is the one shown in picture below. I would say that the NSC is a functionality of the transport orchestrator (pass me the term transport), but that component in many cases, if not all, will only be capable to see connectivity and not service functions, which most likely will be managed by the cloud orchestrator…hence I see it hardly applicable to interface B.
At the same time I don’t think this model would be used over interface A, there I would see something more TMF like.

What’s your opinion? Where do you think model would fit? A? B? Both?

[cid:image003.png@01D75258.B64C4390]

BR
Daniele

From: Teas <teas-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Igor Bryskin
Sent: den 24 maj 2021 16:45
To: teas@ietf.org; Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Teas] SFC and slicing

Right. I suppose we need to hear from operators. Specifically, focusing on the delay SLO I'd like to ask:
1. Is it possible that requested SFs in an SFC need to be time synchronized in a client specific way?
2. If e2e delays D, how the network is supposed to spend the delay budget between SFs in the requested SFC:
a) arbitrarily;
b) evenly.
c) in proportion specified by the client


Cheers,
Igor


On Monday, May 24, 2021, 08:49:31 AM EDT, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>> wrote:



It’s an interesting question : “What would happen if the different parts of the SFC needed different SLOs?”  But that is an “if”. I wonder whether we can decide whether this is likely.



Consider an end-to-end flow. We can easily decide on the end-to-end SLOs. For example, there may be an end-to-end latency requirement. But it seems unlikely that there is a special latency requirement between a pair of SFs. Is there an example, where the SF-to-SF SLO needs to be specific?



Thanks,

Adrian



From: Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin@yahoo.com<mailto:i_bryskin@yahoo.com>>
Sent: 24 May 2021 13:22
To: teas@ietf.org<mailto:teas@ietf.org>; adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Teas] SFC and slicing



Hi Adrian,

Thanks for giving to this some thoughts.

I see a problem with the suggested plan if it turns out along the road that in a requested by a client SFC SF1-> SF2->...->SFn different sets  of SLOs  are required for each/some SFi->SFj links, as well as e2e across the slice. I suggested one way to address this by describing slices as SF aware abstract topologies.

Cheers,

Igor

Get Outlook for Android<https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=513a5706-0ea16fd4-513a179d-866132fe445e-e8d21cc567bd8f43&q=1&e=da75fd5d-9f07-47b6-96bf-3011c6879f6d&u=https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fghei36>



________________________________

From: Teas <teas-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>>
Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2021 1:40:11 PM
To: teas@ietf.org<mailto:teas@ietf.org> <teas@ietf.org<mailto:teas@ietf.org>>
Cc: i_bryskin@yahoo.com<mailto:i_bryskin@yahoo.com> <i_bryskin@yahoo.com<mailto:i_bryskin@yahoo.com>>
Subject: [Teas] SFC and slicing



Hi,

Igor raised the question of "reconciling" the IETF work on service function
chaining and network slicing.

Some of the early discussions on network slicing considered not just
connectivity resources (buffers and bandwidth), but also other resources
that might be found in the network (like storage and compute). I was one of
the people suggesting this, and I know there were others. This would
certainly go some way to bridge the gap to SFC.

However, my understanding is that the design team (and others in the WG)
wanted to push ahead with the definitions for the connectivity resources
first, and consider adding other resources later.

I think this is wise. We have taken quite a long time to get to this point
(especially if you consider the early network slicing BoF), and it is
certainly the case that the first deployment drive is for connectivity
resources. Perhaps we should sort that out first.

That said, I don't think that adding other service descriptions would be
hard. It feels like the definition of further SLOs and SLEs.

If we want to continue this discussion, we should probably involve the SFC
working group to see how they feel about it. But anyone who is interested in
this could certainly begin work on specifying the SLOs and SLEs that they
will want to see added to the NBI.

Best,
Adrian

_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
Teas@ietf.org<mailto:Teas@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
Teas@ietf.org<mailto:Teas@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas