IAM ==== Name: Crossbow - Network Virtualization and Resource Management Submitter: Kais Belgaied Owner: Kais Belgaied Intern: Interest: Status: commitment scheduled 08/20/2008 Comment: preinception held 06/04/2008 Exposure: open SUMMARY ======= Crossbow is a network virtualization technology that greatly improves resource control, performance and network utilization needed to true OS virtualization, utility computing and server consolidation. Crossbow will be the foundation for future innovation in network security (DDOS, IDM, etc.), consolidated appliances, and end-to-end resource control. ISSUES ======= PSARC/2006/357 Crossbow - Network Virtualization and Resource Partitioning Commitment issues ----------------- djr-08 flowadm add-flow: it looks like -a/-p are both synonyms for the same action. the distinction between the two is not great, is it really necessary to have both? Answer: -a for attributes. -p for properties. flowadm follows the exact convention as the existing dladm´s. djr-09 flowadm show-flowprop: why isn't there a parsable output format option for this subcommand? Answer: The project will add an option to make the output parsable, and be consistent with dladm(1m). djr-10 flowadm show-usage: why isn't there a parsable output format option for this subcommand? Answer: The raw format for the information on show-usage comens from the extended accounting framwork. djr-11 flowadm show-usage: instead of using -p for gnuplot and thereafter suggesting an option per output format style, consider using an option plus operand, e.g. "-F gplot" Answer. Makes sense djr-12 flowadm show-flow: rather than use -P for selecting persistent connections, isn't it better to make the output grep'able or for it to be something like "-x persist", encouraging further selection to be added here rather than as top level options? Answer. flowadm needs to be consistent with dladm ged-01 Looking at the provider model, I see a new type mac_intr_t, which is claimed to be an "optimized interrupt handle". I don't understand where this comes from, or how it is used. (The "framework" purportedly can use it to disable or reenable interrupts, but I don't fully see how it does that.) Please elaborate more here. Answer: The structure has 3 fields: An opaque handle for the inerrupt and two function pointers: one for enabling and one for disabling the interrupt. We'll update the spec to include the description ged-02 I don't understand -- the commitment materials indicate that the PPA VLAN hack is used, but the comment above says it was removed. Please clarify. Answer: We're announcing the EOF'ing of the PPA hack with this project. The Deprecated Interfaces section of the interfaces need to be updated to include that EOF'ing. ged-03 In general, it seems like resource controls on flows versus vnics might be "confusing" to customers. Would it be simpler to expose a "default" flow on VNICs, and use the same flowadm tools to manage controls as on VNICs? Answer: We're catering for two audiences at the same time: sys/net administrators that deal with interfaces, etc. The entities they manipulate are data links, using dladm(1m) primarily. For those, resource controls are being offered in a general way as properties assigned to datalinks (vnics, physical interfaces, link aggregations) without really exposing any notion of flow. We're also addressing the classic QoS audience. They are familiar with concepts of flows based on services and protocols. flowadm(1m) is more natural and intuitive for them. VOTE ==== Approve - Kais Belgaied, Rick Matthews, Mark Carlson, Garrett D'Amore Deny - Abstain - Not Participating (NP) - THE NEXT STEP ============= Project team to address TCAs / TCRs / Need Specs. Project team to contact case owner with questions regarding the above and details for next step.