Hi, Pl find the reply inline Thanks & regards, Keshava.A
-----Original Message----- From: Alan Kavanagh [mailto:alan.kavan...@ericsson.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 8:24 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); Kyle Mestery Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][NFV] NFV BoF at design summit Hi Just wanted to comment on some points below inline. /Alan -----Original Message----- From: A, Keshava [mailto:keshav...@hp.com] Sent: May-22-14 2:25 AM To: Kyle Mestery; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][NFV] NFV BoF at design summit Hi In my opinion the first and foremost requirement for NFV ( which is from carrier class ) is 99.99999 ( 5 nines ) reliability. If we want OpenStack architecture to scale to Carrier class below are basic thing we need to address. 1. There should be a framework from open-stack to support 5 nine level reliability to Service/Tennant-VM . ? ( Example for Carrier Class NAT Service/ SIP Service/HLR/VLR service/BRAS service) AK--> I believe what is important is for Openstack to support various degrees of configurations for a given tenant network. The reliability of the network is outside of Openstack, but where Openstack plays a role here imho is for check and validation of the network when its been provisioned and configured. Similarly for VM to ensure we have sufficient check and validation (watchdogs/event call backs etc etc) so that we can "expose faults and act on them". Keshava: In order to provide the reliability to Service/Tenant-VM don't you agree open-stack network also has to be reliable ? Without OpenStack having network reliability to extend of 5 nine can we give the same to Service/Tenant-VM ? 2. They also should be capable of 'In-service up gradation" (ISSU) without service disruption. AK--> Fully agree, its imperative to be able to upgrade Openstack without any service interruption. 3. OpenStack itself should ( its own Compute Node/L3/Routing, Controller ) have (5 nine capable) reliability. AK--> If we are referring to Openstack controllers/agents/db's etc then yes makes perfect sense, I would however stop short on saying you can achieve 5 nine's in various ways and its typically up to the vendors themselves how they want to implement this even in OS. Keshava: I think we better to talk with one of the Tennant-VM hosted on OpenStack as example discuss more about this. So that it will be clear and we will have common language to speak. If we can provide such of infrastructure to NFV then we think of adding rest of requirement . Let me know others/NFv people opinion for the same. Thanks & regards, Keshava.A -----Original Message----- From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mest...@noironetworks.com] Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 11:49 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][NFV] NFV BoF at design summit On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Ian Wells <ijw.ubu...@cack.org.uk> wrote: > I think the Service VM discussion resolved itself in a way that > reduces the problem to a form of NFV - there are standing issues using > VMs for services, orchestration is probably not a responsibility that > lies in Neutron, and as such the importance is in identifying the > problems with the plumbing features of Neutron that cause > implementation difficulties. The end result will be that VMs > implementing tenant services and implementing NFV should be much the > same, with the addition of offering a multitenant interface to Openstack > users on the tenant service VM case. > > Geoff Arnold is dealing with the collating of information from people > that have made the attempt to implement service VMs. The problem > areas should fall out of his effort. I also suspect that the key > points of NFV that cause problems (for instance, dealing with VLANs > and trunking) will actually appear quite high up the service VM list as well. > -- There is a weekly meeting for the Service VM project [1], I hope some representatives from the NFB sub-project can make it to this meeting and participate there. Thanks, Kyle [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ServiceVM > Ian. > > > > On 18 May 2014 20:01, Steve Gordon <sgor...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Sumit Naiksatam" <sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com> >> > >> > Thanks for initiating this conversation. Unfortunately I was not >> > able to participate during the summit on account of overlapping sessions. >> > As has been identified in the wiki and etherpad, there seem to be >> > obvious/potential touch points with the advanced services' >> > discussion we are having in Neutron [1]. Our sub team, and I, will >> > track and participate in this NFV discussion. Needless to say, we >> > are definitely very keen to understand and accommodate the NFV >> > requirements. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > ~Sumit. >> > [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/AdvancedServices >> >> Yes, there are definitely touch points across a number of different >> existing projects and sub teams. The consensus seemed to be that >> while a lot of people in the community have been working in >> independent groups on advancing the support for NFV use cases in >> OpenStack we haven't necessarily been coordinating our efforts >> effectively. Hopefully having a cross-project sub team will allow us to do >> this. >> >> In the BoF sessions we started adding relevant *existing* blueprints >> on the wiki page, we probably need to come up with a more robust way >> to track these from launchpad :). Further proposals will no doubt >> need to be built out from use cases as we discuss them further: >> >> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NFV >> >> Feel free to add any blueprints from the Advanced Services efforts >> that were missed! >> >> Thanks, >> >> Steve >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
