[sfc-dev] [OpenDaylight Discuss] [lispflowmapping-dev] [groupbasedpolicy-dev] Honeycomb, App Coexistence, Overlay Layer... do we need meetings/calls

Curt Beckmann beckmann at Brocade.com
Tue Aug 11 20:09:37 UTC 2015


I agree with this notion of carving up OpenFlow tables to support different layer APIs.  There’s not yet any formal mechanism to manage/configure/enforce that but I like this discussion as a way to start thinking about it.

Curt

From: Colin Dixon [mailto:colin at colindixon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 9:16 PM
To: Edward Warnicke
Cc: Anil Vishnoi; discuss at lists.opendaylight.org; Florin Coras -X (fcoras - AAP3 INC at Cisco); sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org; groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org; lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org; Prem sankar G; Curt Beckmann
Subject: Re: [OpenDaylight Discuss] [lispflowmapping-dev] [sfc-dev] [groupbasedpolicy-dev] Honeycomb, App Coexistence, Overlay Layer... do we need meetings/calls

Sure, so a table type pattern (TTP) is really designed to model a full switch pipeline including tables, legal matches in those tables, legal actions/instructions in those tables (and thus the allowed flow through tables because of the goto table action), and some other metadata.
I *think* you could have different layers or co-existing apps expose a subset of a TTP and the broader TTP would represent the cross-app pipeline. That would give you a common scratchpad in which apps could be chained. There's even support for referencing tables by name instead of number so that you can pull together the pipeline first and then assign numbers to tables later.
The YANG model for TTPs is here:
https://github.com/opendaylight/ttp/blob/master/ttp-model/src/main/yang/ttp.yang
The spec is here:
https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/sdn-resources/onf-specifications/openflow/OpenFlow%20Table%20Type%20Patterns%20v1.0.pdf

--Colin

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Edward Warnicke <hagbard at gmail.com<mailto:hagbard at gmail.com>> wrote:
Could you say a bit more about TTP?

Might it make sense to use TTP as the 'registry' of subpiplines from various layers?

Ed

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Colin Dixon <colin at colindixon.com<mailto:colin at colindixon.com>> wrote:
+1. I'm very interested.
As an aside, TTPs came up in the context of a few of these discussions, but mostly application co-existence, at the summit. In essence, TTPs are a way to model multi-table OpenFlow pipelines. Along those lines, the might be useful in defining concrete, programmable, composable pipeline chunks. They are also likely useful as a way for providing virtual pipelines which can be transformed to actual pipelines in the switch. In fact, there are ongoing efforts between the ONF, ODL the TTP project along those lines.
--Colin

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Edward Warnicke <hagbard at gmail.com<mailto:hagbard at gmail.com>> wrote:
The meeting for 7am on Thursday is set, you should be able to follow this link to it:

https://www.google.com/calendar/render#eventpage_6%7Ceid-b3VnYW1kZXU4bmhndmVuNHVoNWE1cG9pYzAgaDc5aGltYm9rcThhYXVyOWxlZDhvYzc5MGdAZw-1-0-

But just in case, here is the webex info:

When it's time, start the meeting from here:
https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/meetings/join?uuid=MDHJCXR45WFFOUDWYX9FPOR0VK-9VIB


Agenda
This meeting does not have an agenda.

Access Information
Where: WebEx Online
Meeting number: 198 700 967
Meeting password: This meeting does not require a password.
Host key: 262524 (Use this key in the meeting if you have made someone else the host and then want to reclaim the host role.)

Audio Connection
1-855-244-8681<tel:1-855-244-8681> Call-in toll-free number (US/Canada)
1-650-479-3207<tel:1-650-479-3207> Call-in toll number (US/Canada)
Access code: 198 700 967

Need more numbers or information?
Check out toll-free calling restrictions:
https://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf


On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Anil Vishnoi <vishnoianil at gmail.com<mailto:vishnoianil at gmail.com>> wrote:
Ed,

Please include me as well.  Thursday works better for me.

Thanks
Anil

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:37 PM, Florin Coras -X (fcoras - AAP3 INC at Cisco) <fcoras at cisco.com<mailto:fcoras at cisco.com>> wrote:
+1 on Thursday

Florin

From: <lispflowmapping-dev-bounces at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:lispflowmapping-dev-bounces at lists.opendaylight.org>> on behalf of "Vina Ermagan (vermagan)"
Date: Friday, August 7, 2015 at 9:03 PM
To: Edward Warnicke, Prem sankar G
Cc: "discuss at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:discuss at lists.opendaylight.org>", "sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>", "groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>", "lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>"
Subject: Re: [lispflowmapping-dev] [sfc-dev] [groupbasedpolicy-dev] Honeycomb, App Coexistence, Overlay Layer... do we need meetings/calls

+1 on Thursday

Vina

From: Edward Warnicke <hagbard at gmail.com<mailto:hagbard at gmail.com>>
Date: Friday, August 7, 2015 10:00 AM
To: Prem sankar G <prem.sankar.g at ericsson.com<mailto:prem.sankar.g at ericsson.com>>
Cc: "discuss at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:discuss at lists.opendaylight.org>" <discuss at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:discuss at lists.opendaylight.org>>, "sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>" <sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>>, "groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>" <groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>>, "lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>" <lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>>
Subject: Re: [sfc-dev] [groupbasedpolicy-dev] Honeycomb, App Coexistence, Overlay Layer... do we need meetings/calls

How would folks feel about 7am PST Tue or Thursday of next week for a kickoff?

Ed

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Prem sankar G <prem.sankar.g at ericsson.com<mailto:prem.sankar.g at ericsson.com>> wrote:
Ed,
+1 and would be interested to participate in all of these topics.
Thanks,
Prem

From: groupbasedpolicy-dev-bounces at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:groupbasedpolicy-dev-bounces at lists.opendaylight.org> [mailto:groupbasedpolicy-dev-bounces at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:groupbasedpolicy-dev-bounces at lists.opendaylight.org>] On Behalf Of Edward Warnicke
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 4:15 PM
To: discuss at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:discuss at lists.opendaylight.org>; lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:lispflowmapping-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>; groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:groupbasedpolicy-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>; sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:sfc-dev at lists.opendaylight.org>
Subject: [groupbasedpolicy-dev] Honeycomb, App Coexistence, Overlay Layer... do we need meetings/calls

At the ODL Design Summit, we had a series of discussions around:

- App Coexistence via layered/stacked pipelines
- Growing a proper overlay topology layer that could meet the needs of various other layers (Policy, SFC, etc)
- Honeycomb - building a distributed ODL agent out of ODL parts that could run on the local server

I've had several folks reach out to me unicast wanting to get involved in one or more of these,
and so I was curious if there was any interest or appetite for some kind of a regular meeting/call/IRC meeting about them so we can coordinate together.

One of the interesting parts about all three of these is that they are less 'A new project with a new repo' and more 'Initiatives for projects to cross collaborate in interesting ways'.  There's work to be done, but its often cross project work.

Thoughts?

Ed


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:Discuss at lists.opendaylight.org>
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



--
Thanks
Anil


_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.opendaylight.org<mailto:Discuss at lists.opendaylight.org>
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/sfc-dev/attachments/20150811/25c42e9c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the sfc-dev mailing list