Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

John, thank you for quick review. I am up against some time here. Sorry if I interrupted you :) >> However I must be missing something fundamental as this looks >> almost exactly like the current ACL schema with the addition >> of a label, useful for deleting flows. Yes it is similar. I have

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

i <muralidharan.rangach...@huawei.com<mailto:muralidharan.rangach...@huawei.com>>, Russell Bryant <russ...@ovn.org<mailto:russ...@ovn.org>>, "discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>" <discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.or

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

To add on John's explanation on OpenStack networking-sfc API, each > port-chain can be dynamically associated with zero, one or more flow > classifiers. A port-chain created without association with a flow > classifier means there is no flow going through that chain path yet. A flow > classifier

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

-Original Message- From: discuss [mailto:discuss-boun...@openvswitch.org] On Behalf Of John McDowall Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 9:53 AM To: Muralidharan Rangachari; Murali R Cc: discuss@openvswitch.org Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv] Murali, Let me try and work through the networking

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

John/Russell Please provide feedback on the schema as well as few questions listed below. You guys are aware of current code base and want to know if something like this can be implemented or if there is any design constraint/contradictions. "Custom_Lflows": { "columns": {

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

Murali, Sorry for being a little slow here but could you give me an example of what you want to do to a flow - steer it to a network application (or chain of network applications). Each network application may perform some function on the flow and then forward it to the next network application.

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

John, Generally, I understand how the networking-sfc has evolved. It works well around firewalls, routers and switches and possibly load balancers. Those are traditional applications for service chaining. One of the first attempts was done by me early last year modifying ovs-agent and used

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

Murali, Let me try and work through the networking-sfc API to see where the issues are: The port-pair construct defines the input/output ports of the VNF. If the VNF only has one port then they are the same. The port-pair-group construct enables load balancing across a set of VNFs. Not something

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

> When you say "dynamic chains" are you referring to reordering linear chains > or are you talking about graphs where the path can change dynamically. In > the case of the changes what would trigger the changes? We have orchestration mechanism to define the flows out of a graph and can be sent

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

ryant <russ...@ovn.org<mailto:russ...@ovn.org>>, "discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>" <discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>>, "mural...@huawei.com<mailto:mural...@huawei.com>" <mural...@huawei.com<

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

> ovn-architecture.7.xml > > ovn-nb.xml > > I have talked to the networking-sfc team and I think we have an approach > to use the networking-sfc interface in

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

gt; From: Russell Bryant <russ...@ovn.org<mailto:russ...@ovn.org>> >> Date: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 6:48 PM >> To: John McDowall >><jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com<mailto:jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com>> >> Cc: Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org&l

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

ate: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 6:48 PM > To: John McDowall > <jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com<mailto:jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com>> > Cc: Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org<mailto:b...@ovn.org>>, > "discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>"

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

: John McDowall <jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com<mailto:jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com>> Cc: Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org<mailto:b...@ovn.org>>, "discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>" <discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.o

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

: John McDowall <jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com<mailto:jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com>> Cc: Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org<mailto:b...@ovn.org>>, "discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>" <discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.o

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:15 PM, John McDowall < jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote: > > I was hoping to have a broad informal meetup at Openstack Summit – I agree > with keeping everything in the open. I was hoping to get some additional > use cases from interested parties as it will help

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>> Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv] I won't be at the OpenStack Summit this time around. I'm happy to jump on the phone sometime for quick clarifications if needed, but in general I think it's best if we keep discussion in public as much as

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

; > From: Russell Bryant <russ...@ovn.org> > Date: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 6:06 AM > To: John McDowall <jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com> > Cc: Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org>, "discuss@openvswitch.org" < > discuss@openvswitch.org> > Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv] >

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

g>" <discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>> Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv] On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 6:56 PM, John McDowall <jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com<mailto:jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com>> wrote: Russell, Thanks of taking the time to provi

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 6:56 PM, John McDowall < jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com> wrote: > Russell, > > Thanks of taking the time to provide a detailed response. Let me try and > answer your questions, and ask a few on my own. > >1. Yes, I want to continue working through this as we see it

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

o:discuss@openvswitch.org>" <discuss@openvswitch.org<mailto:discuss@openvswitch.org>>, John McDowall <jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com<mailto:jmcdow...@paloaltonetworks.com>> Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv] On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ov

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > Russell, you had some thoughts about SFC in OVN. I had the impression > that the approach you had in mind was more powerful than what John is > suggesting here, yet still not very complicated. I think you said that > you

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > Russell, you had some thoughts about SFC in OVN. I had the impression > that the approach you had in mind was more powerful than what John is > suggesting here, yet still not very complicated. I think you said that > you

Re: [ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

Russell, you had some thoughts about SFC in OVN. I had the impression that the approach you had in mind was more powerful than what John is suggesting here, yet still not very complicated. I think you said that you weren't going forward with it for now because other things were higher priority.

[ovs-discuss] [ovn4nfv]

As a VNF vendor we have been looking at ways to enable customers to simply scale up (and down) VNF’s in complex virtual networks at scale. Our goal is to help accelerate the deployment of SDN and VNF’s and more specifically enable zero-trust security at scale for applications. This requires the