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

2015-01-12 Thread Vikram Choudhary
Hi Alan,

We are now in the process of doing It :)

Thanks
Vikram

From: lv.erc...@zte.com.cn [mailto:lv.erc...@zte.com.cn]
Sent: 12 January 2015 12:57
To: Vikram Choudhary
Cc: Dongfeng (C); Dhruv Dhody; Kalyankumar Asangi; OpenStack Development 
Mailing List (not for usage questions); sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com
Subject: 答复: RE: [openstack-dev] 答复: Re: [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion 
about the solution of the service chaining!

Hi Virkram,

Glad to hear that. Have you implemented that?

BR
Alan






发件人: Vikram Choudhary 
vikram.choudh...@huawei.commailto:vikram.choudh...@huawei.com
收件人: lv.erc...@zte.com.cnmailto:lv.erc...@zte.com.cn 
lv.erc...@zte.com.cnmailto:lv.erc...@zte.com.cn,
抄送:OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, 
sumitnaiksa...@gmail.commailto:sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com 
sumitnaiksa...@gmail.commailto:sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com, Dhruv Dhody 
dhruv.dh...@huawei.commailto:dhruv.dh...@huawei.com, Dongfeng (C) 
albert.dongf...@huawei.commailto:albert.dongf...@huawei.com, Kalyankumar 
Asangi kaly...@huawei.commailto:kaly...@huawei.com
日期: 2015/01/12 13:05
主题:RE: [openstack-dev] 答复: Re:  [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion 
about the solution of the service chaining!




Hi Alan,

We have also proposed an idea about SFC.
For more details you can refer to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146315/


Thanks
Vikram

-Original Message-
From: Sumit Naiksatam [mailto:sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com]
Sent: 09 January 2015 01:39
To: lv.erc...@zte.com.cnmailto:lv.erc...@zte.com.cn
Cc: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] 答复: Re: [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion 
about the solution of the service chaining!

Hi Alan,

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:54 PM,  
lv.erc...@zte.com.cnmailto:lv.erc...@zte.com.cn wrote:
 Hi Sumit,

 thanks for your reply, one more question,

 If I just using the 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' to
 developing the service chaining feuture, how to map the network
 service in the neutron to the GBP model, because all the network
 service we implemented are based on neutron model, but the
 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' setup the service chaining based
 on GBP model, so how can we setup the service chaining for network
 services based the neutron model using the 
 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' ?

The current model and implementation leverage the Neutron services as is (the 
model is actually agnostic of the service definition/implementation). Will be 
happy to further discuss this, feel free to ping on #openstack-gbp.

Thanks,
~Sumit.


 BR
 Alan




 发件人: Sumit Naiksatam 
 sumitnaiksa...@gmail.commailto:sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com
 收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
 日期: 2015/01/08 10:46
 主题:Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about
 the solution of the service chaining!
 



 Hi Alan,

 Responses inline...

 On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:25 AM,  
 lv.erc...@zte.com.cnmailto: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.


 Yes, the above two blueprints have been implemented and are available
 for consumption today as a part of the Group-based Policy codebase and
 release. The GBP model uses a policy trigger to drive the service
 composition and can accommodate different rendering policies like
 realization using NFV SFC.

 We are developing the service chaining feature, so we need to know
 which one is the neutron's choice.

 It would be great if you can provide feedback on the current
 implementation, and perhaps participate and contribute as well.

 Are the blueprints about the service insertion, service chaining and
 traffic steering list in JunoPlan all Abandoned ?


 Some aspects of this are perhaps a good fit in Neutron and others are
 not. We are looking forward to continuing the discussion on this topic
 on the areas which are potentially a good fit for Neutron (we have had
 this discussion before as well).

 BR
 Alan



 
 ZTE Information Security Notice: The information

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

2015-01-11 Thread Vikram Choudhary
Hi Alan,

We have also proposed an idea about SFC. 
For more details you can refer to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/146315/


Thanks
Vikram

-Original Message-
From: Sumit Naiksatam [mailto:sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 09 January 2015 01:39
To: lv.erc...@zte.com.cn
Cc: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] 答复: Re: [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion 
about the solution of the service chaining!

Hi Alan,

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:54 PM,  lv.erc...@zte.com.cn wrote:
 Hi Sumit,

 thanks for your reply, one more question,

 If I just using the 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' to 
 developing the service chaining feuture, how to map the network 
 service in the neutron to the GBP model, because all the network 
 service we implemented are based on neutron model, but the 
 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' setup the service chaining based 
 on GBP model, so how can we setup the service chaining for network 
 services based the neutron model using the 
 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' ?

The current model and implementation leverage the Neutron services as is (the 
model is actually agnostic of the service definition/implementation). Will be 
happy to further discuss this, feel free to ping on #openstack-gbp.

Thanks,
~Sumit.


 BR
 Alan




 发件人: Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com
 收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
 日期: 2015/01/08 10:46
 主题:Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about
 the solution of the service chaining!
 



 Hi Alan,

 Responses inline...

 On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:25 AM,  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.


 Yes, the above two blueprints have been implemented and are available 
 for consumption today as a part of the Group-based Policy codebase and 
 release. The GBP model uses a policy trigger to drive the service 
 composition and can accommodate different rendering policies like 
 realization using NFV SFC.

 We are developing the service chaining feature, so we need to know 
 which one is the neutron's choice.

 It would be great if you can provide feedback on the current 
 implementation, and perhaps participate and contribute as well.

 Are the blueprints about the service insertion, service chaining and 
 traffic steering list in JunoPlan all Abandoned ?


 Some aspects of this are perhaps a good fit in Neutron and others are 
 not. We are looking forward to continuing the discussion on this topic 
 on the areas which are potentially a good fit for Neutron (we have had 
 this discussion before as well).

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



 
 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

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

2015-01-08 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Alan,

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:54 PM,  lv.erc...@zte.com.cn wrote:
 Hi Sumit,

 thanks for your reply, one more question,

 If I just using the 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' to developing the
 service chaining feuture, how to map the network service in the neutron to
 the GBP model, because all the network service we implemented are based on
 neutron model, but the 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' setup the
 service chaining based on GBP model, so how can we setup the service
 chaining for network services based the neutron model using the
 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' ?

The current model and implementation leverage the Neutron services as
is (the model is actually agnostic of the service
definition/implementation). Will be happy to further discuss this,
feel free to ping on #openstack-gbp.

Thanks,
~Sumit.


 BR
 Alan




 发件人: Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com
 收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org,
 日期: 2015/01/08 10:46
 主题:Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about
 the solution of the service chaining!
 



 Hi Alan,

 Responses inline...

 On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:25 AM,  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.


 Yes, the above two blueprints have been implemented and are available
 for consumption today as a part of the Group-based Policy codebase and
 release. The GBP model uses a policy trigger to drive the service
 composition and can accommodate different rendering policies like
 realization using NFV SFC.

 We are developing the service chaining feature, so we need to know which
 one
 is the neutron's choice.

 It would be great if you can provide feedback on the current
 implementation, and perhaps participate and contribute as well.

 Are the blueprints about the service insertion,
 service chaining and traffic steering list in JunoPlan all Abandoned ?


 Some aspects of this are perhaps a good fit in Neutron and others are
 not. We are looking forward to continuing the discussion on this topic
 on the areas which are potentially a good fit for Neutron (we have had
 this discussion before as well).

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



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

2015-01-07 Thread lv . erchun
Hi Sumit,

thanks for your reply, one more question,

If I just using the 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' to developing 
the service chaining feuture, how to map the network service in the 
neutron to the GBP model, because all the network service we implemented 
are based on neutron model, but the 'group-based-policy-service-chaining' 
setup the service chaining based on GBP model, so how can we setup the 
service chaining for network services based the neutron model using the 
'group-based-policy-service-chaining' ?

BR
Alan




发件人: Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com
收件人: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage 
questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, 
日期:   2015/01/08 10:46
主题:   Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about 
the solution of the service chaining!



Hi Alan,

Responses inline...

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:25 AM,  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.


Yes, the above two blueprints have been implemented and are available
for consumption today as a part of the Group-based Policy codebase and
release. The GBP model uses a policy trigger to drive the service
composition and can accommodate different rendering policies like
realization using NFV SFC.

 We are developing the service chaining feature, so we need to know which 
one
 is the neutron's choice.

It would be great if you can provide feedback on the current
implementation, and perhaps participate and contribute as well.

 Are the blueprints about the service insertion,
 service chaining and traffic steering list in JunoPlan all Abandoned ?


Some aspects of this are perhaps a good fit in Neutron and others are
not. We are looking forward to continuing the discussion on this topic
on the areas which are potentially a good fit for Neutron (we have had
this discussion before as well).

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



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