#opnfv-sfc: opnfv-sfc-weekly
Meeting started by tbachman at 14:06:16 UTC
(full logs).
Meeting summary
-
- Daniel Smith (lmcdasm,
14:06:24)
- tbachman (tbachman,
14:06:27)
- Agenda (tbachman, 14:06:42)
- Nicolas Bouthors (bouthors,
14:06:45)
- Dave Dolson (DaveD_,
14:06:49)
- Paul Quinn (paulq,
14:07:08)
- https://wiki.opnfv.org/service_function_chaining
(ebrjohn,
14:07:33)
- ebrjohn says we’re skipping the clustering
action item for now (tbachman,
14:08:44)
- paulq asks why opnfv doesn’t use specific
mailing lists (tbachman,
14:09:40)
- ebrjohn says that opnfv early on decided to
have a single list and use filters (tbachman,
14:10:06)
- bryan_att says that you can set filters using
mailman (tbachman,
14:10:52)
- ebrjohn says the agenda is carrying on with the
slides that cover initializing OPNFV and SFC, and openstack
orchestration (tbachman,
14:11:32)
- OPNFV SFC initialization (tbachman, 14:11:51)
- https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1gbhAnrTYbLCrNMhMXin0lxjyg-7IHNPjrlBTIjwAzys/edit?usp=sharing
Slides for OPNFV/SFC (tbachman,
14:13:00)
- ebrjohn says he added the GBP endpoints, added
SFC/OpenStack coordinator (tbachman,
14:14:10)
- paulq says the GBP depiction might be a bit off
— wrt to the classifier; he’ll collect his feedback and provide it
in an email to ebrjohn (tbachman,
14:14:42)
- bryan_att asks if the coordinator is outside
ODL, or something else (tbachman,
14:15:34)
- tbachman says oops (paulq,
14:15:48)
- ebrjohn says there’s a configuration hole: SFC
needs to know information about the VMs (e.g. addressing); this is
one of the functions of the coordinator (tbachman,
14:16:32)
- lmcdasm notes that most of the info is
available from the neutron DB (tbachman,
14:18:05)
- lmcdasm says if you want to know the port
definition, then you can query neutron for this information; one of
the catch-22’s is if the VNF or Service Function is set up as a VM,
then neutron may not be aware; otherwise, this is a simple query to
neutron (tbachman,
14:20:13)
- paulq asks if you can find the relationship
between a VM (e.g. a firewall) and the OVS instance it’s connected
to (tbachman,
14:20:29)
- lmcdasm says nova fires up the VM, neutron
attaches the port; openstack isn’t aware of what the VM is doing
(e.g. firewall); but you can associate the port with the vritual NIC
for that VM (tbachman,
14:21:03)
- lmcdasm says you can’t have 2 ports on the same
subnet, so you know which port is connected to a given subnet
(tbachman,
14:21:48)
- rapenno says from an ODL provisioning
perspective, you create a Service Function, and then goes to an
orchestrator to request a VM to get the information (tbachman,
14:22:19)
- bryan_att says he’d like to hear more
information on how the life cycle works (tbachman,
14:23:20)
- paulq says he’d like to get a bullet-point list
and API pointers so we can see how this looks and works (tbachman,
14:23:44)
- lmcdasm says his initial understanding was that
it was a pull model from openstack; this new model suggests that ODL
is interacting with OpenStack to create VMs for things (e.g.
firewalls) (tbachman,
14:24:58)
- ebrjohn says we should create two mini-groups:
1 to work on the coordinator, another to work on a setup
(tbachman,
14:25:36)
- ebrjohn says there are two use cases: reactive
approach and proactive approach; the first is reacting to VM
creation, the second creates VMs (tbachman,
14:26:08)
- lmcdasm is in favor of picking one approach or
the other, rather than both (tbachman,
14:26:27)
- ebrjohn says we need work on both the
coordinator, and work on the piece that brings everything up
(tbachman,
14:28:52)
- lmcdasm says that we have everything with the
exception of the coordinator today (tbachman,
14:29:14)
- paulq asks what is a service function and what
is it’s relation to OVS (tbachman,
14:29:59)
- lmcdasm says a service function is something an
application does; the relation between an SF and OVS is that OVS is
the fabric that the SF runs on (tbachman,
14:30:30)
- ebrjohn says we need a mapping for a service
function type (e.g. FW) to actual glance images (tbachman,
14:30:57)
- bryan_att says we should take that as part of
the coordinator discussion — he’d like to address this at the
upcoming hackfest/summit (tbachman,
14:31:25)
- bryan_att says the reactive and proactive
approaches should be part of the bullet-list analysis (tbachman,
14:32:45)
- lmcdasm says something missing is what do you
want to run with those applications (tbachman,
14:32:57)
- lmcdasm says we should start simple — pick to
things that you’d like to chain today and see how to make that
work (tbachman,
14:33:59)
- paulq says firewall and DPI would be a good
first start (tbachman,
14:34:08)
- bryan_att says as noted VNFD is the place where
the metadata about “what type of function this VM provides” would
live (tbachman,
14:34:29)
- lmcdasm says the first thing a mini-group
should do is define the specifics — what is the VM, what is the
glance image, etc. (tbachman,
14:35:28)
- bryan_att says the purpose of each vNIC on a VM
also needs to be clear in the metadata, so that the proper port can
be chained, e.g. "Service", "admin", "storage", etc (tbachman,
14:36:21)
- DaveD_ and bouthors are interested in working
with the architecture mini-group (tbachman,
14:38:16)
- ebrjohn wants a mini group to investigate how
to stand up architecture shown in his “OPNFV SFC Initial NW
Topology, V2” slide (tbachman,
14:39:08)
- bryan_att notes that what the user wants and
what the service provider wants might be two different perspectives
— we should take this into account when looking at the
architectures (tbachman,
14:40:34)
- lmcdasm says he wasn’t clear from ebrjohn’s
email whether this includes enabling/disabling or configuring ports
on physical switches (tbachman,
14:42:45)
- ebrjohn says he wouldn’t want to remove any
functionality we already have — we should just be adding to
it (tbachman,
14:43:09)
- lmcdasm says an end-user asks for creation of a
service function, but the service provider might have to provision
the virtual and physical resources for this; do we want to supercede
this and have SFC be in control of this? (tbachman,
14:43:54)
- repenno agrees — we have to decide who is the
master of a give vSwitch (tbachman,
14:44:18)
- lmcdasm says we already have an injector that
reads an OVF file and deploys it into openstack (tbachman,
14:49:01)
- ACTION: repenno to
create a workflow diagram for SFC and will email to the OPNFV-SFC
group (tbachman,
14:50:56)
- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CQ6HODjk-sa5jSdZm9l6ygxc3TWTE8Zpgq3_NFbK1mc/edit?usp=sharing
Document that shows the SFC workflow (tbachman,
14:51:26)
- bryan_att asks to put links in OPNFV-SFC wiki
to any demos, code, etc. that can be shared about what’s been done
before (tbachman,
14:51:54)
- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CQ6HODjk-sa5jSdZm9l6ygxc3TWTE8Zpgq3_NFbK1mc/edit#heading=h.rrqnx1heyzli
Agenda for upcoming Hackfest (tbachman,
14:53:51)
- lmcdasm says we should bring in icbts (Jamie
Goodyear) or others who are karaf experts (tbachman,
14:53:59)
- DaveD_ asks what the forum is for discussing
slide 5 (tbachman,
14:54:26)
- ebrjohn says the best place for now is the
mailing list (use tag/filter in brackets) (tbachman,
14:54:46)
Meeting ended at 14:58:52 UTC
(full logs).
Action items
- repenno to create a workflow diagram for SFC and will email to the OPNFV-SFC group
People present (lines said)
- tbachman (89)
- collabot (9)
- bryan_att (6)
- DaveD_ (5)
- ebrjohn (4)
- paulq (4)
- bouthors (2)
- lmcdasm (2)
- MR_Sandvine (1)
Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.