Yoav , Kang Xi

if the below two are not goal

a.1- If performance  or latency on VxLAN is not being monitored and not the 
goal for individual  vCPE

a.2 - Also if multiple Instances of vCPE existing at the same time  is not to 
be supported

Then whether vCPE is  deployed across  multiple DC or single DC it makes no 
difference .Hence I would agree  to what is described below .

with best regards


From: onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org <onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
on behalf of Yoav Kluger <yoav.klu...@amdocs.com>
Sent: 10 August 2017 03:52:41
To: Kang Xi; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] vCPE: Consider multi-cloud support in R2

Kang, all,

Sorry could not attend the meeting (which collided with the ARC meeting).

I would propose to not view the connectivity between clouds as a problem, or 
use case, ONAP needs to solve. Service provides who have deployed multiple 
clouds have typically also established connectivity between them, in most cases 
via some type of a L2 VPN. When ONAP instantiates VNFs there is an assumption 
that it can then communicate with them, e.g. for configuration or closed loop 
operations, over an OAM overlay network. We do not bother showing how this OAM 
network is routed, and in particular how SDNC, as an example, can communicate 
with a VNF which happens to be instantiated in a remote DC. We assume whatever 
underlay is need is in place which allows communicating with all VNFs over the 
one OAM network.

Similarly, if two VNFs are assumed to communicate over regular IP networking 
(not to be confused with service chaining), then, without loss of generality, 
we can showcase them in one DC, assuming that if in real life they were to be 
instantiated in two DCs, then the inter-dc connectivity already in place would 
enable them to communicate just as well.

The other alternative would be that we would have to showcase each VNF in a 
separate DC – to “make sure” the use case works under any deployment scenario. 
This obviously does not make sense, and fortunately is also not needed for the 
reasons sated above.

I would therefore submit that the vCPE use case, which instantiates all its 
VNFs in a single DC, is sufficient to showcase ONAP’s capability to instantiate 
and manage a vCPE use case under any deployment.


Yoav Kluger

Amdocs Technology




From: Kang Xi [mailto:kang...@huawei.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 11:37 AM
To: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Cc: Yunxia Chen <helen.c...@huawei.com>; Pawłowski Michał 1 - Korpo 
<michal.pawlows...@orange.com>; Yoav Kluger <yoav.klu...@amdocs.com>; FREEMAN, 
BRIAN D <bf1...@att.com>
Subject: vCPE: Consider multi-cloud support in R2

Hi All,

During the meeting “[integration] vCPE for R1: Support multiple clouds or not?” 
(Aug. 8 11:00-11:25am EST), the attendees unanimously concluded to leave the 
support for multiple clouds to the next release. For R1, the release 
implementation will only target a single cloud set up.

The rationale behind the above conclusion is that multi-cloud support, while 
technically feasible, would need quite some discussions to decide on multiple 
issues including lab set up, network set up, work flow design, etc. Adding it 
to R1 would further tighten the R1 schedule.

The list of attendees is shown below:




This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at 
onap-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to