Re: draft-morton-bmwg-virtual-net-00

Hi Bhavani,

- do we need to consider or compare performance with the real/physical network vs. the virtual network
- in 3.2 do we need Virtual Switch

[MD] We do need to provide methodologies to benchmark for three architectures vSwitch/SR-IOV and PCI bypass.
Regarding comparing performance only PCI bypass can be compared with physical world.  Again we are not benchmarking networks here but the virtual appliance and wherever needed comparison will be laid out for both Physical and virtual appliance.

for 3.2 how about load balancers, firewalls - do we need to consider, what kind of DPI
    - firewalls - stateful vs stateless
[MD] Virtual appliance is broader term - it means virtual Load balancer  and firewalls (both state full and stateless)
We won't be suggesting "kind of DPI" - Standard method will be provided to qualify appliance for any type of DPI  

Regards,
Muhammad
-----Original Message-----
From: bmwg [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bhavani Parise
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 12:03 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [bmwg] draft-morton-bmwg-virtual-net-00

Al,
    including the WG list also for my comments/Qs for this draft. These are a few things which we can look into including as considerations for this draft.

- also for 3.2 - for VNF itself, do we need location of the VNF - guest VM,separate process, appliance etc
- 
    - what kind of considerations we need to note when testing a Virtual Firewall Function
- how many Tenants can a VNF support?
- for 3.3 - how about VM mobility or VNF mobility itself


thanks,
Bhavani
________________________________________

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg