Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network functions
PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ <pedroa.aranda@tid.es> Wed, 28 May 2014 12:04 UTC
Return-Path: <pedroa.aranda@tid.es>
X-Original-To: vnfpool@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vnfpool@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 108251A0099
for <vnfpool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.852
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3,
RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham
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 vpDVTqm0siPL for <vnfpool@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Wed, 28 May 2014 05:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from correo-bck.tid.es (correo-bck.tid.es [195.235.93.200])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38AB11A00CD
for <vnfpool@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbrightmailg02.hi.inet (Sbrightmailg02.hi.inet [10.95.78.105])
by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug
8 2006))
with ESMTP id <0N6A0041V9IQZB@tid.hi.inet> for vnfpool@ietf.org; Wed,
28 May 2014 14:04:04 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from vanvan (vanvan.hi.inet [10.95.78.49]) by sbrightmailg02.hi.inet
(Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id FB.47.04155.04BE5835; Wed,
28 May 2014 15:57:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from correo.tid.es (mailhost.hi.inet [10.95.64.100])
by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006))
with ESMTPS id <0N6A007899ISE7@tid.hi.inet> for vnfpool@ietf.org; Wed,
28 May 2014 14:04:04 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from EX10-MB1-MAD.hi.inet ([169.254.1.165])
by EX10-HTCAS6-MAD.hi.inet ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Wed,
28 May 2014 14:04:29 +0200
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 12:04:28 +0000
From: PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ <pedroa.aranda@tid.es>
In-reply-to: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645D26543@dfweml701-chm.china.huawei.com>
X-Originating-IP: [10.95.64.115]
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>,
"vnfpool@ietf.org" <vnfpool@ietf.org>
Message-id: <CFAB9CFA.C73E%paag@tid.es>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_OvNA9w1wGFquD/4OfM6oKA)"
Content-language: es-ES
Accept-Language: es-ES, es-ES, en-US
Thread-topic: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network functions
Thread-index: AQHPavgYEx3xMAyBFkmloyUW4dqDcJs31msAgADhkQCAAK0NAIAbhmgAgAEYRoA=
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.1.140326
X-AuditID: 0a5f4e69-f79426d00000103b-0f-5385eb404c23
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrAIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXCFe9nqOvwujXYoOcxv8WMS/9ZHBg9liz5
yRTAGMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVsX3haeaCWxMZK57dOcHcwPi4l7GLkZNDQsBEomP7F3YIW0zi
wr31bF2MXBxCAtsZJQ49esgK4fxmlDi4+igzhDMTyNnXxwbSwiKgKnGj7TWYzSZgJTF381+w
scICjhLT5q8Ai3MKREhsunacFWKFgsSfc49ZQGwRgWCJz29OMYPYvALqEntvLGGCsAUlfky+
B1TDwcEs4CnReqoSJMwsIC4x59dEVpAwo4CKxIT9xRBTnCSObjkENdFP4s3FDWAXiAroSbw7
Pp8JYquAxJI955khbFGJl4//Qf31n1Hia9talgmMYrOQbJ6FsHkWks0QYU2J9bv0IcKKElO6
H7JD2BoSrXPmQtlmEhP+vGZDVrOAkWMVo1hxUlFmekZJbmJmTrqBkV5Gpl5mXmrJJkZIPGbu
YFy+U+UQowAHoxIP74tjLcFCrIllxZW5hxglOJiVRHiXHWkNFuJNSaysSi3Kjy8qzUktPsQo
zcGiJM7L/K4oQEggPbEkNTs1tSC1CCbLxMEp1cCoUHTbakf+lzmbq1eJxF7Q/+Www9HqltmP
1dNb3p00fXr16+f2p6UypUb7ZBKifvrMZfT2XZMnlhG1OlJiY8Aq86PZm94L7TY2iL4Vzdn6
xuLnP/m1+t4q0z9N29KiFGvY+niBl9KGG7N51qlKvEifvSrl5k9m718fCso2thgJsQaUMLt2
vvuixFKckWioxVxUnAgADeDqscMCAAA=
References: <536BE238.7090907@nomountain.net> <CF92450E.BA88%paag@tid.es>
<4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645D07B26@dfweml701-chm.china.huawei.com>
<CF93961A.BB59%paag@tid.es>
<4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645D26543@dfweml701-chm.china.huawei.com>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/vnfpool/g59UcR9GZeGuuKI4SiRbSY3PYdU
Subject: Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network functions
X-BeenThere: vnfpool@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for virtual network function resource pooling."
<vnfpool.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vnfpool>,
<mailto:vnfpool-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vnfpool/>
List-Post: <mailto:vnfpool@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vnfpool-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vnfpool>,
<mailto:vnfpool-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 12:04:14 -0000
Hi Linda, Yes, it would do it! Best, /PA Dr. Pedro A. Aranda Gutiérrez Technology Exploration - Network Innovation & Virtualisation mailto:paag@tid.es Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo C/ D. Ramón de la Cruz,84 28006 Madrid, Spain Fragen sind nicht da, um beantwortet zu werden. Fragen sind da, um gestellt zu werden. Georg Kreisler De: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com<mailto:linda.dunbar@huawei.com>> Fecha: martes, 27 de mayo de 2014 23:20 Para: PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ <pedroa.aranda@tid.es<mailto:pedroa.aranda@tid.es>>, "vnfpool@ietf.org<mailto:vnfpool@ietf.org>" <vnfpool@ietf.org<mailto:vnfpool@ietf.org>> Asunto: RE: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network functions Pedro, I see your point. Do you think adding the following sentence at the end of the Section 1 can address the issues you brought up? "It worth noting that the proposed mechanism also works for unprotected hardwarebased service functions." Linda -----Original Message----- From: vnfpool [mailto:vnfpool-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2014 2:00 AM To: vnfpool@ietf.org<mailto:vnfpool@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network functions Hi Linda, Congratulations for reading through a coding mess :-) Answers inline, Best, /PA Dr. Pedro A. Aranda Gutiérrez Technology Exploration - Network Innovation & Virtualisation mailto:paag@tid.es Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo C/ D. Ramón de la Cruz,84 28006 Madrid, Spain Fragen sind nicht da, um beantwortet zu werden. Fragen sind da, um gestellt zu werden. Georg Kreisler El 10/05/14 00:40, "Linda Dunbar" <linda.dunbar@huawei.com<mailto:linda.dunbar@huawei.com>> escribió: >Pedro, > >Are you saying that the physical boxes also have chance to fail, why >VNFpool emphasizes so much on Virtualized Network Functions? Yes, physical boxes also tend to fail (in the worst possible moment, if you believe in Murphy’s law :-) ) >Here is my take on this issue: > >It is very likely that the physical devices, either compute or storage >devices, have embedded restoration & protection mechanism. OK, but at what price? If you want to keep costs at a reasonable level, you will probably go to a virtualised environment, with HW that is more cost effective and with simpler mechanisms for resilience. >Take your storage example, many storage arrays have their own embedded >protection mechanism. When a server write/read from a storage array, it >doesn't know if the data is from stand-by devices. Once again, I agree. But while many do, not all have it necessarily. This is also a question of costs. Thus we can’t take protection for granted in ‘discrete’ boxes. >Whereas, in the virtualized environment, functions instantiated on >virtual mechanism doesn't have its own protection mechanism. Therefore, >the "high availability" requires the "coordination" among all the other >instances, hopefully in the standard way. Completely agree. And hopefully we can use the same standard mechanisms in cost effective physical (as opposed to virtualised) devices, too. >Linda My point is that I see network functions independently of the device that implements them and whether this is a physical device or a virtualised function. IMHO, hybrid environments tend to have the advantage of lowering the entry barrier: continue using what you have deployes and press the last dime out of it while introducing next-gen solutions in a virtualised environment that is more cost-effective than your current system. This ‘soft’ introduction also alleviates the pressure of having to cope with something completely new on network admins. Best,/PA ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx _______________________________________________ vnfpool mailing list vnfpool@ietf.org<mailto:vnfpool@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vnfpool ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
- [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network functi… Melinda Shore
- Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network fu… Dave Dolson
- Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network fu… karagian
- Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network fu… PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ
- Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network fu… Linda Dunbar
- Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network fu… PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ
- Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network fu… Linda Dunbar
- Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network fu… PEDRO ANDRES ARANDA GUTIERREZ
- [vnfpool] 答复: Virtualized vs. physical network fu… Zongning
- Re: [vnfpool] Virtualized vs. physical network fu… Susan Hares