Subject: [OPSAWG] Comments on draft-xjz-nfv-model-problem-statement-00.txt

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 15:48:09 -0400

While looking this draft over, I was concerned about the relationship 
between Network Function Virtualization (NFV) and SDN, and whether the 
proposal meant that the IETF would be working on a regional model (ETSI 
oriented) which overlapped with models being developed and implemented 
by other organizations. Checking out the web for background information 
(couldn't find the cited ETSI references), I found this nice comparison 
table. I reproduce it from Prayson Pate's blog at

http://www.overturenetworks.com/blog/tags/network-function-virtualization

with kind permission of Overture. If it represents the general 
understanding of the relationship between the two technologies, my 
concerns are met.

As a general comment, the subject area proposed seems huge. I imagine 
any charter items would be scoped much more narrowly, so it's a question 
of figuring out priorities.

Tom Taylor

Basic Concept

     SDN          Separate control and data, centralize control
                  and programmability of network

     NFV          Relocate network functions from dedicated
                  appliances to generic servers

Target Location

     SDN          Campus, data center / cloud

     NFV          Service provider network

Target Device

     SDN          Commodity servers and switches

     NFV          Same

Initial Applications

     SDN          Cloud orchestration and networking

     NFV          Routers, Firewalls, gateways, CDN,
                  WAN accelerators, SLA assurance

New Protocols

     SDN          OpenFlow

     NFV          None

Formalization

     SDN          Open Networking Foundation (ONF)

     NFV          ETSI NFV Working Group

---

From: "Zhouqian (Cathy)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 02:53:37 +0000

Hi Tom,
Sorry for the later reply and thanks for your comments. Please see inline.

Best Regards,
Cathy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
> Behalf Of Tom Taylor
> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 3:48 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked];
> [email-masked]
> Subject: [OPSAWG] Comments on
> draft-xjz-nfv-model-problem-statement-00.txt
> 
> by other organizations. 

In my understanding, ETSI will focus on the information model only . It will not 
describe the detailed protocol and data models, which may be the work of other 
SDOs, e.g., IETF, OASIS and etc., if we'd like to use the protocols/languages from 
these SDOs.

>checking out the web for background information

> of figuring out priorities.

Maybe the name seems a bit huge, we can determine it later. But the scope is not 
huge actually. We will not work on all the NFV data models, rather, we only focus 
on three parts: NFV Service, VNF Forwarding Graph and VNF. To define the YANG 
data models of the three elements is our ultimate goal.
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg