Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about the solution of the service chaining!

[Yuriy.Babenko]

Hi,
we really like the idea to address the SFC use-case in Neutron working group.
We would be happy to work with the community to work out the way to consume 
service-chains via standardized neutron-api and provide use-cases and 
blueprints.
Some initial ideas on the use-case can be found in the following etherpad [1].

Keshava, we think that it would be ideal to have two type of use-cases: one 
which you described below (“dynamic” one) with the usage of IETF-defined header 
but also one “static” one where the whole chain can be pre-provisioned by the 
orchestrator via Neutron-API  w/o usage of classifier and header extensions.
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kKIqu2ipN6

Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Yuriy Babenko

Von: A, Keshava [mailto:keshav...@hp.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. Januar 2015 07:19
An: mest...@mestery.com; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage 
questions)
Betreff: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about the 
solution of the service chaining!

Yes, I agree with Kyle decision.

First we should define what is Service.
Service is within OpenStack infrastructure ? or Service belongs  to NFV 
vNF/Service-VM ?
Based on that its Chaining needs to be defined.
If it is chaining of vNFs(which are service/set of services)  then it  will be 
based on ietf  ‘service header insertion’ at the ingress.
This header will have all the set services  that needs to be executed  across 
vNFV, will be carried in each of the Tennant packet.

So it requires coordinated effort along with NFV/Telco  working groups.

keshava

From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mest...@mestery.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 8:25 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about the 
solution of the service chaining!

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:25 AM, 
mailto:lv.erc...@zte.com.cn>> wrote:
Hi,

I want to confirm that how is the project about "Neutron Services Insertion, 
Chaining, and Steering" going, I found that all the code implementation about 
service insertion、service chaining and traffic steering list in JunoPlan were 
Abandoned .

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/AdvancedServices/JunoPlan

and I also found that we have a new project about GBP and 
group-based-policy-service-chaining be located at:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+spec/group-based-policy-abstraction

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+spec/group-based-policy-service-chaining

so I'm confused with solution of the service chaining.

We are developing the service chaining feature, so we need to know which one is 
the neutron's choice. Are the blueprints about the service insertion, service 
chaining and traffic steering list in JunoPlan all Abandoned ?
Service chaining isn't in the plan for Kilo [1], but I expect it to be 
something we talk about in Vancouver for the Lxxx release. The NFV/Telco group 
has been talking about this as well. I'm hopeful we can combine efforts and 
come up with a coherent service chaining solution that solves a handful of 
useful use cases during Lxxx.

Thanks,
Kyle

[1] 
http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/priorities/kilo-priorities.html

BR
Alan





ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail (and 
any attachment transmitted herewith) is privileged and confidential and is 
intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s).  If you are not an intended 
recipient, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or 
use of the information contained is strictly prohibited.  If you have received 
this mail in error, please delete it and notify us immediately.




___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [Telco] [NFV] Service function chaining

[Yuriy.Babenko]

Hi all, 

as discussed per last IRC meeting we prepared first thoughts on the 
requirements on Service Function Chaining (SFC) and relevant use-case. 

We have an etherpad for initial draft ideas. Later on we should move it to 
wiki. 

All comments are very welcome. 

https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kKIqu2ipN6

Best, 
Yuriy 
Deutsche Telekom 

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV][Telco] Service VM v/s its basic framework

[Yuriy.Babenko]

Hi,
in the IRC meeting yesterday we agreed to work on the use-case for service 
function chaining as it seems to be important for a lot of participants [1].
We will prepare the first draft and share it in the TelcoWG Wiki for discussion.

There is one blueprint in openstack on that in [2]


[1] 
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/telcowg/2014/telcowg.2014-12-17-14.01.txt
[2] 
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+spec/group-based-policy-service-chaining

Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Yuriy Babenko

Von: A, Keshava [mailto:keshav...@hp.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Dezember 2014 19:06
An: stephen.kf.w...@gmail.com; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for 
usage questions)
Betreff: Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV][Telco] Service VM v/s its basic framework

Hi Murali,

There are many unknows w.r.t ‘Service-VM’ and how it should from NFV 
perspective.
In my opinion it was not decided how the Service-VM framework should be.
Depending on this we at OpenStack also will have impact for ‘Service Chaining’.
Please find the mail attached w.r.t that discussion with NFV for ‘Service-VM + 
Openstack OVS related discussion”.


Regards,
keshava

From: Stephen Wong [mailto:stephen.kf.w...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 10:03 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV][Telco] Service VM v/s its basic framework

Hi Murali,

There is already a ServiceVM project (Tacker), currently under development 
on stackforge:

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ServiceVM

If you are interested in this topic, please take a look at the wiki page 
above and see if the project's goals align with yours. If so, you are certainly 
welcome to join the IRC meeting and start to contribute to the project's 
direction and design.

Thanks,
- Stephen


On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Murali B 
mailto:mbi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi keshava,

We would like contribute towards service chain and NFV

Could you please share the document if you have any related to service VM

The service chain can be achieved if we able to redirect the traffic to service 
VM using ovs-flows

in this case we no need to have routing enable on the service VM(traffic is 
redirected at L2).

All the tenant VM's in cloud could use this service VM services  by adding the 
ovs-rules in OVS


Thanks
-Murali




___
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [Telco] [NFV] [Heat] Telco Orchestration

[Yuriy.Babenko]

Angus,
do you have specific questions?
We could describe in detail what we mean with all these abbreviations.. )
This is kind of telco slang, but surely there is a need to describe this in 
more detail for OpenStack Community should the need be.

Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Yuriy Babenko

Von: Angus Salkeld [mailto:asalk...@mirantis.com]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. November 2014 12:48
An: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Betreff: Re: [openstack-dev] [Telco] [NFV] [Heat] Telco Orchestration

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Marc Koderer 
mailto:m...@koderer.com>> wrote:
Hi all,

as discussed during our summit sessions we would like to expand the scope
of the Telco WG (aka OpenStack NFV group) and start working
on the orchestration topic (ETSI MANO).

Therefore we started with an etherpad [1] to collect ideas, use-cases and
requirements.

Hi Marc,
You have quite a high acronym per sentence ratio going on that etherpad;)
From Heat's perspective, we have a lot going on already, but we would love to 
support
what you are doing.
You need to start getting specific about what you need and what the missing 
gaps are.
I see you are already looking at higher layers (TOSCA) also check out Murano as 
well.

Regards
-Angus


Goal is to discuss this document and move it onto the Telco WG wiki [2] when
it becomes stable.

Feedback welcome ;)

Regards
Marc
Deutsche Telekom

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/telco_orchestration
[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TelcoWorkingGroup

___
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