Re: [vnfpool] Follow-up question from the BOF

[Martin Stiemerling <[e-mail]>]

Hi Richard,

Am 22.07.14 um 17:34 schrieb Y. Richard Yang:
> Hi Martin,
>
> Here is one point. One constraint of the proposed work, in my view, is
> that the scope does not consider state management. Most useful NFs are
> stateful. Hence, removing state management from the scope is not ideal,
> and hence is a limit. There is interesting recent progress in generic,
> reusable NF state management, such as Merge/Split
> (https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/nsdi13/nsdi13-final205.pdf).
> If this is included, I believe that the group can develop a lot more
> more solutions.

state management is an interesting topic, but there has been explicit 
community feedback during the first bof that this is not something the 
potential wg should be working on, as this is very vendor specific.

   Martin