Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Srinivasa Addepalli

Saved on

compared with

New Version 4

changes.mady.by.user Srinivasa Addepalli

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Reverted from v. 2

...

Panel
borderColorRed

Please put your @name in one of the option column for each attribute (or the "ALL" for simplicity) and provide any comments you might have.

AttributeOption 1Option 2Option 3Comments
"ALL"


All the listed attributes (for simplicity).
vduCpuRequirements




Xu Yang: Possible redundant attributes: numVirtualCpu, virtualCpuClock, logicalCpuPinningPolicy, logicalCpuThreadPinningPolicy, computeRequirements

Alexander Vul: the computeRequirements attribute is not HPA related.

Srinivasa Addepalli :  Based on this document (http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/NFV-IFA/001_099/011/02.04.01_60/gs_NFV-IFA011v020401p.pdf),  I guess you already have numVirtualCPU, virtualCPUClock, vitualCPUPinning, virtualCPUoversubscriptionPolicy in virtualCPUData. I did not see vduCPURequirements defined in the document. So, I am not sure where the redundancy is.  In any case,   I agree with Xu Yang that there should not be any redundant attributes.   Since we have 'requestAdditonalCapability' IE for any advanced attributes, I prefer we remove 'vduCpuRequirements' element from the 'virtualCPUData' to avoid any confusion.


vduMemRequirementsSrinivasa Addepalli : Same comment as above.  Since we have 'requestAdditonalCapability' IE for any advanced attributes, I prefer we remove 'vduMemRequirements' element from the 'virtualMemoryData' to avoid any confusion.vduStorageRequirementsSrinivasa Addepalli : Same comment as above.  Since we have 'requestAdditonalCapability' IE for any advanced attributes, I prefer we remove '





vduStorageRequirements' element from the 'virtualStorageDesc' to avoid any confusion.



logicalNode


Xu Yang: Question: In the example document, the logical node requirements are categorized into compute, memory and network categories. But in IFA011, only one logicalNode attribute is defined, what's the mapping here?Srinivasa Addepalli :  Based on explanation in IFA011, it appears to me that one use case for this is to specify NUMA nodes.  I feel that NUMA can be specified in 'requestAdditionalCapability'.  So, personally, I feel that this term is confusing and would like to see any advanced capability requirements to be pushed to 'requestAddtionalCapability', which is generic to represent feature requirements.  Alexander Vul has final say from Intel side (smile)

nicIoRequirements


Xu Yang: Question: related to the above comment, if the network logical node requirements are specific, should this be a dedicated data type instead of a reference?Srinivasa Addepalli:  I have related question. Why is this reference? Is it meant to represent 'virtio','pci-passthrough' and 'sriov nic' kind of information?  In any case, few examples would be good.

networkInterfaceRequirementsSrinivasa Addepalli : Same comment as above.  Since we have 'requestAdditonalCapability' IE for any advanced attributes, I prefer we remove 'networkInterfacesRequirements' element from the 'virtualNetworkInterfaceRequirements' to avoid any confusion.