Re: [vnfpool] Overlap with SFC?

Hi, Adrian,

Thanks for raising this question. Actually vnfpool folks have been discussing this question a lot since the very beginning of this work.

We believe vnfpool and SFC are independent and complementary mainly due to the below reasons:
1) SFC targets on steering packets among service function nodes. vnfpool focuses on redundancy for service nodes, e.g., selecting standby nodes, handling nodes transition/failure cases, without caring how 
2) vnfpool manager in our proposal could interact with SFC control entity to: 1) advertise redundant service nodes; 2) notify status of redundant nodes when required; 3) receive resiliency requirements from SFC control entity (if any); and so on.
3) vnfpool is not only used in "chained service nodes", but applicable to other cases where service nodes are not necessarily sequentially connected.

I appreciate any further feedback and advice from you or IESG, as I believe these feedback will greatly improve the quality of our proposed charter.

Thanks.

-Ning

> -----Original Message-----
> From: vnfpool [mailto:vnfpool-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 1:57 AM
> To: vnfpool@ietf.org
> Subject: [vnfpool] Overlap with SFC?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The IESG is looking at the BoF requests for London, and a question came up on
> the overlap between the proposal here and items 4 and 5 in the SFC Charter.
> 
> I think it would be valuable if you could discuss the overlap and the
> interaction between the two efforts so that there is a clear view.
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> vnfpool mailing list
> vnfpool@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vnfpool