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

Yuriy.Babenko at telekom.de Yuriy.Babenko at telekom.de
Wed Jan 14 16:03:11 UTC 2015

we really like the idea to address the SFC use-case in Neutron working group.
We would be happy to work with the community to work out the way to consume service-chains via standardized neutron-api and provide use-cases and blueprints.
Some initial ideas on the use-case can be found in the following etherpad [1].

Keshava, we think that it would be ideal to have two type of use-cases: one which you described below (“dynamic” one) with the usage of IETF-defined header but also one “static” one where the whole chain can be pre-provisioned by the orchestrator via Neutron-API  w/o usage of classifier and header extensions.
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kKIqu2ipN6

Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Yuriy Babenko

Von: A, Keshava [mailto:keshava.a at hp.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. Januar 2015 07:19
An: mestery at mestery.com; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Betreff: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about the solution of the service chaining!

Yes, I agree with Kyle decision.

First we should define what is Service.
Service is within OpenStack infrastructure ? or Service belongs  to NFV vNF/Service-VM ?
Based on that its Chaining needs to be defined.
If it is chaining of vNFs(which are service/set of services)  then it  will be based on ietf  ‘service header insertion’ at the ingress.
This header will have all the set services  that needs to be executed  across vNFV, will be carried in each of the Tennant packet.

So it requires coordinated effort along with NFV/Telco  working groups.


From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mestery at mestery.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 8:25 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][AdvancedServices] Confusion about the solution of the service chaining!

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:25 AM, <lv.erchun at zte.com.cn<mailto:lv.erchun at zte.com.cn>> wrote:

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 .


and I also found that we have a new project about GBP and group-based-policy-service-chaining be located at:



so I'm confused with solution of the service chaining.

We are developing the service chaining feature, so we need to know which one is the neutron's choice. Are the blueprints about the service insertion, service chaining and traffic steering list in JunoPlan all Abandoned ?
Service chaining isn't in the plan for Kilo [1], but I expect it to be something we talk about in Vancouver for the Lxxx release. The NFV/Telco group has been talking about this as well. I'm hopeful we can combine efforts and come up with a coherent service chaining solution that solves a handful of useful use cases during Lxxx.


[1] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/priorities/kilo-priorities.html



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 at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150114/db8d71b7/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list