[Sdnp] Proposed SDN BOF charter

[Thomas Nadeau]

On Sep 22, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Ong, Lyndon wrote:

> Support this as well - correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounded to me as if a plug-in could for example reside on an edge switch, where the model is distributed control, but reside on a controller in an OF model, SDNP should be able to support both.

	Precisely.  

	BTW, you were writing up the use case for the former, right? 8)

	--Tom


> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Lyndon
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sdnp-bounces at lucidvision.com [mailto:sdnp-bounces at lucidvision.com] On Behalf Of Anton Ivanov
> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 1:20 PM
> To: sdnp at lucidvision.com
> Subject: Re: [Sdnp] Proposed SDN BOF charter
> 
> On 22/09/11 20:59, Thomas Nadeau wrote:
>> On Sep 22, 2011, at 3:11 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Hi Tom,
>>> 
>>> So would it be the right observation (being now on both sides of the efforts) that SDNP WG would be more focused on the northbound API side of the controller (here called conductor) to the actual applications while ONF WGs are (at least at this point) focused southbound controller<->  switch and west/east controller<->  controller coming soon ?
>>> 
>>> If this is right assessment the only thing a bit disturbing are those "plugins" in your charter which you are aiming to work on. And btw those plugins are already being discussed by ONF.
>>> 
>>> Looking at SDNP archives I see that back in July Ed from Google have already provided the pointer to some slides describing update on OF hardware abstraction layer proposal.
>>> 
>>> http://goo.gl/MDRRx
>>> 
>>> Especially if you are not going to touch data plane I am quite puzzled how are you going to specify any HAL.
>>> 
>>      The point of the group's work was never to specify a HAL like the one ONF is working on. This is why we keep repeating that
>> we are not intending to work on the data plane or interface directly to it; instead will be talking to control planes that will do that.
>> Whether the control planes are intimately connected to the hardware, or distributed in say the ONF model is
>> irrelevant because we will always talk to the "controlling software". That is clearly different from anything the ONF is
>> working on. They are focusing on the HAL and the controller interface to it. Even if they ever define a north bound interface
>> to a controller, that doesn't preclude a plug-in interface to that versus a direct one to that might be defined to talk to a controller
>> today using their proprietary web services API, for example.
>> 
>>      --Tom
>> 
> 
> ++1
> 
> --
>     Humans are allergic to change. They love to say, "We've always
> done it this way." I try to fight that. That's why I have a clock
> on my wall that runs counter-clockwise.   -- R.A. Grace Hopper
> 
> A. R. Ivanov
> E-mail:  anton.ivanov at kot-begemot.co.uk
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SDNP mailing list
> SDNP at lucidvision.com
> http://lucidvision.com/mailman/listinfo/sdnp
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SDNP mailing list
> SDNP at lucidvision.com
> http://lucidvision.com/mailman/listinfo/sdnp
>