Re: [vnfpool] New Charter for Toronto

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Fri, 04 July 2014 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 CA4311B2E63 for <vnfpool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 11:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 ovuLHBhfaeR1 for <vnfpool@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 11:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (asmtp4.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 309911B2E5C for <vnfpool@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 11:32:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s64IW01H003121; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 19:32:00 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s64IVw8w003094 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 4 Jul 2014 19:31:59 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Don Clarke' <D.Clarke@cablelabs.com>, 'Zongning' <zongning@huawei.com>, vnfpool@ietf.org
References: <B0D29E0424F2DE47A0B36779EC6667796616CDC0@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <F67D8AE3B3893148B7E3EF3977D554E5402168@EXCHANGE.cablelabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <F67D8AE3B3893148B7E3EF3977D554E5402168@EXCHANGE.cablelabs.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 19:31:52 +0100
Message-ID: <0ec801cf97b6$3a660400$af320c00$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EC9_01CF97BE.9C2E63A0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQL1TVX33y6XDgqr0E62DMj7iKcISgLrSoyrmS11ulA=
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1017-20798.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--27.051-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--27.051-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: yebcs53SkkDRhEyb9f1sjghWgIsZuXlPGSqdEmeD/nUC5WKtSs0Iv8hg wglSjPsLGEK7I4zsfn9e1AFSKjFQ8yYffDhK8sjJV9LwT29+rzap7eIcybi6oSQ37TuGigkb27S CZTa2t0qOLEVJNiQKgnylQ2at2EtqvHmmKJkwZOS4jAucHcCqna8WUNN9WehaZM25ZAWwDYYIZJ R7eWK/XDqjyFfqBLqlZyPbixOGVCBp71qAvI563k3suC/LuKpdQPCPzycuBFMOkJQR4QWbsDcuo 3EoNtwLTXzie8nJX6IuDKaWBhg8NnXOLnYa1mG+T7jCYv2QJPELBTNIdp+7bha6DRt6Sf/fRTg4 JSdU5fz4l1LNAW7cUOtKJ5X3SmTJfPmUQQG69pzmXEF3MwNZbjoSfZud5+Gg87rPiCP1jeCd8Y6 4luJmv9nLzK9o1xRISR1MtKFnpBMERznX5Usjmvv+//lqU1h645oDENe4eesJQDk2+4484PB8ks kKxiHuPXwdv4QPT6DTAK4/jiVfb+XGeJTjN8iqk3rl+MaNgxAjo8c0NkYYIp1uGX2i4E0OH7eMB QFeFwvXerHp2eyhCWJVHm/j9yxpb4veVDHQ5AEtrWjCN9l/FuOQ2i6l6A6yaxKBbTWINAvy67HG lbS8BKNPLsRUE6Gk5j2YUuVMMdRl+YLqdHPX1UdAWPMBu8kQx3lyq2zCKQBL4P/1QuCcTNrKbeL V7rdXogSQgg+Gc50z2vVoE43Gu/BRRUamfheMiFoorQjboWnzWqWqi0pBAQ4AepdqPBUYupNsDJ huPOukBywKohVqXrYIuy18hqhUVCFefQRV3M6eAiCmPx4NwGmRqNBHmBvevqq8s2MNhPB9j2Gwz TE3vXkguuQorcgMlHnCBbIfm9UyoCYNPZhPp0PG9YWU5R/mvMsVZWB7qxd+3BndfXUhXQ==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/vnfpool/u5c0JCZqu3YA7GlTnTi3vesqFxQ
Cc: "'WRIGHT, STEVEN A'" <sw3588@att.com>, naseem.a.khan@verizon.com, raquel.morera@verizon.com, diego@tid.es, tetsuya.nakamura.cu@nttdocomo.com
Subject: Re: [vnfpool] New Charter for Toronto
X-BeenThere: vnfpool@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
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: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 18:32:23 -0000

Hi Don,
Just chipping in from the side lines....
I think this group of people working on VNFpool and those in the SFC working
group take the work done by ETSI on NFV very seriously. They coordinate closely
with Diego Lopez and consider the ETSI work as input.
However, your proposed text might be a little unusual in an IETF working group
charter. More likely would be to add to the final paragraph as:
OLD
We will work closely with the SFC WG, as we believe that SFC and VNF Pool are
complementary. SFC would essentially see a VNF Pool-enabled VNF as a normal
service function and therefore be able to merge it into an SFC just like any
other service functions. Just like the communication between any pool users and
VNF Pool, the information exchanged between the VNF Pool and the SFC may include
some operational information of the VNF Pool.
NEW
The VNFpool working group will work closely with the SFC WG, as SFC and VNF Pool
are complementary: SFC would essentially see a VNF Pool-enabled VNF as a normal
service function and therefore be able to merge it into an SFC just like any
other service functions. Just like the communication between any pool users and
VNF Pool, the information exchanged between the VNF Pool and the SFC may include
some operational information of the VNF Pool. Furthermore, the VNFpool working
group will exchange information with ETSI to ensure that the work done by that
body is taken into account and to share the progress of the working group as it
produces documents.
 
Cheers,
Adrian (hating HTML emails)
From: vnfpool [mailto:vnfpool-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Don Clarke
Sent: 04 July 2014 17:19
To: Zongning; vnfpool@ietf.org
Cc: WRIGHT, STEVEN A; naseem.a.khan@verizon.com;
tetsuya.nakamura.cu@nttdocomo.com; diego@tid.es; raquel.morera@verizon.com
Subject: Re: [vnfpool] New Charter for Toronto
 
Ning and All,
 
I welcome this work as I have a strong belief that such mechanisms if properly
implemented will enable NFV-based network topologies to provide many more
options for delivering scalable high reliability networks than traditional
point-hardware bounded topologies. I have highlighted this message in public
statements whenever I get an opportunity and I have encouraged efforts in the
ETSI NFV ISG towards this goal.
 
I would like to see a reference in this charter to related work in the ETSI NFV
ISG for example in the REL Working Group (Naseem Khan copied) and the INF
Working Group (Steve Wright copied). Also MANO (Raquel Morera copied). I know
that you and no doubt many others on this list are involved in both places, but
could we at least see some words in this charter that acknowledge relevant
requirements coming from the NFV ISG?
 
Suggested text in line below.
 
Regards,
Don Clarke.
 
Chair, NFV ISG Network Operator Council
 
From: vnfpool [mailto:vnfpool-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Zongning
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 8:37 PM
To: vnfpool@ietf.org
Subject: [vnfpool] New Charter for Toronto
 
Hi, all,
Please find below the new VNFPool Charter, by which I'd like to keep
entertaining you. J
This new version is based on the list discussion and feedback mainly from LAC
Chidung, Hidetoshi, Sood, and Adrian. Thank you guys for improving our charter.
Although I'd regard this version as a stable charter that reflects a rough
agreement on the list and is ready for Toronto, further comments and suggestions
are *always* welcome.
=======================================================================
Network functions such as firewalls, load balancers, and WAN optimizers are
conventionally deployed as specialized hardware servers in both network
operators' networks and data center networks as the building blocks of network
services. There is a trend to implement such network functions as software
instances running on general purpose servers, via a virtualization layer (i.e.,
hypervisors). These virtualized functions are called Virtualized Network
Functions (VNFs), which can be used to build network services.
The use of VNFs introduces additional challenges to the reliability of the
provided network services. A single VNF instance would typically not have
built-in reliability mechanisms on its host (i.e., a general purpose server).
Instead, there are more risk factors such as software failure at various levels
including hypervisors and virtual machines, hardware failure, and instance
migration that can make a VNF instance unreliable.
In order to achieve higher reliability, a VNF implementation may adopt a pooling
mechanism, where a number of VNF instances with the same function can be grouped
as a pool to provide the function. We call such a pool a VNF Pool. Conceptually,
a Pool Manager is used to manage a VNF Pool, e.g., selects active/standby VNF
instances, and potentially interacts with a service control entity. Such a
service control entity is an entity that orchestrates a set of network functions
to build network services. The major benefit of using VNF Pool is that
reliability mechanisms such as redundancy model are achieved by the VNF Pool
adopted by the VNF and thus not visible to the service control entity. A VNF
Pool-enabled VNF still appears as a normal VNF when orchestrated by a service
control entity.
Questions that are raised by the addition of a pooling mechanism to VNF include:
.    How to manage the redundancy model, e.g., select active/standby VNF
instances in a VNF Pool considering the infrastructure conditions, and scale a
VNF instance in a VNF Pool?
.    What pool states need to be maintained to support the pooling mechanism
itself, and how are such states maintained?
.    What information is exchanged between a VNF and a service control entity?
For example, how can a VNF Pool be addressed by the service control entity?
.    After a VNF instance failover, how does the Pool Manager notify the service
control entity of some characteristic changes of the VNF, e.g., capacity change,
but without disclosure of the pooling procedure?
The WG will refer to published ETSI NFV ISG documents relevant to this work,
notably (but not limited to) the outputs of the REL, MANO and INF Working Groups
to ensure that VNF Pooling mechanisms are compatible with the requirements
published by the ETSI NFV ISG.
The WG initially focuses on several reliability mechanisms that are mainly
associated with a redundancy model based on a VNF Pool. Additional mechanisms
may include pool state maintenance only for pooling purpose. Service state
synchronization is out of scope for this phase. The WG assumes that a VNF Pool
contains redundant VNF instances of a same functional type. Different types of
VNFs are envisioned to be held in separate VNF Pools. VNF Pool composed of both
virtualized and non-virtualized functional instances may be included after
further use case and requirements study. The WG will address the reliability of
an individual VNF, but not the reliability related to the control or the routing
between adjacent VNFs that can form a network service.
Specifically, the WG will study the following technical aspects:
.           Redundancy management within a VNF Pool, such as the signaling
between the Pool Manager and the instances in the pool for instance
registration, backup instances selection, and switching between active and
standby instances.
.           Protocol between the Pool Manager and the underlying network to
collect the network information required for appropriate placement/selection of
backup instances.
.           Protocol between a VNF and the service control entity to exchange
operational information between a VNF Pool and the service control entity.
.           Identification and analysis of reliable interfaces, such as
transport protocol like MPTCP and SCTP for reliable delivery of the messages
associated with the redundancy management within a VNF Pool.
.           Analysis of pooling security characteristics and requirements to
identify and mitigate threats against the pooling mechanism. Identification of
an appropriate trust model between pool members, and between pool members and
the Pool Manager.
The WG plans to deliver a problem statement, a set of use cases, requirements
and an architecture covering the aforementioned technical aspects, and gap
analysis of existing technologies including but not limited to RSerPool. We will
rely heavily on existing IETF technologies, but that gaps will be found around
problems like redundancy mechanisms, state maintenance solely for pooling
purposes, reliable transport, and trust/security, all of which will need to be
considered and addressed. Although no decision on protocols will be made in this
phase, we will keep open for candidate protocols for VNF Pool. The WG will seek
re-chartering before adopting any work to develop new, or extend existing,
protocols.
We will work closely with the SFC WG, as we believe that SFC and VNF Pool are
complementary. SFC would essentially see a VNF Pool-enabled VNF as a normal
service function and therefore be able to merge it into an SFC just like any
other service functions. Just like the communication between any pool users and
VNF Pool, the information exchanged between the VNF Pool and the SFC may include
some operational information of the VNF Pool.
Goals and Milestones:
December 2014 - Submit VNFPool Problem Statement to IESG for publication as an
Informational document.
April 2015 - Submit VNFPool Use Cases to IESG for publication as an
Informational document.
August 2015 - Submit VNFPool Requirements, including the manageability of VNF
Pool to IESG for publication as an Informational document.
August 2015 - Submit VNFPool Architecture to IESG for publication as an
Informational document.
December 2015 - Submit one or more Applicability and Gap Analysis of existing
protocols to VNFPool to IESG for publication as Informational document(s).
=======================================================================
Thanks.
-Ning