Re: [vnfpool] comments on VNF Pool Charter

["Sood, Kapil" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ning,  Please see below…I trimmed the thread for readability…

A couple comments, maybe questions, on the VNF Charter:

1.      The point below indicates “to collect network information”…did you consider collecting the platform information as well?  I would suggest to add that.

[Ning] I’d think “platform information” may be too general term to be focused. In our charter, we collect network information for specific purpose, e.g., place a live and backup VNF instances into distributed physical locations, or locations without shared risk in the network. Could you please elaborate more on the purpose of using any specific piece of platform information, or give some use cases? We could then think about how to make it more focused, as required by the charter.
[Kapil] ETSI-NFV has defined multiple use cases for NFV placements/migration that depends on the target NFVI (platform) conditions – e.g. available CPU, Memory, Network Capabilities, etc.  So, it makes sense to consider those requirements as we define this charter.  Please share what network information this group is looking to collect and what are the possible sources?  Those might not be too different from some of the VNFI information sources.

[Ning] You are right that a rich set of platform conditions are useful for VNF instance placement. This group will not address the whole issue of VNF deployment, but only focus on redundancy. One issue we have identified in Problem Statement I-D is to distribute active & standby instances into different network locations to avoid shared risk. Some existing interfaces defined by IETF (e.g., ALTO, I2RS) may be utilized to obtain network information such as network topology, link status, for such purpose. I do agree with you that if there are more requirements on placing VNF instance, more NFVI information should be considered. At this stage, I’d prefer to add a few words like “considering the infrastructure conditions…” in the bullet under “Questions that are raised…” in the charter. Is this OK for you?
[Kapil] Well, I believe there will be many cases where the VIM/VNFM will need to determine the infrastructure conditions, even for SBY/ACT placements,  so I agree your suggestion to add appropriate text to the charter questions.

I do have a follow-up question on the contents of the specific images, more specifically live state including any secrets or sensitive information protection.  Is the charter dealing with the security aspects, too?