Subject: [forces] On the OF ForCES comparison

From: Jamal Hadi Salim <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 12:00:36 -0400

Me again.

I share the same thinking expressed in Sue's presentation at the meeting.
It does seem like ONF/OF is re-inventing a lot of  the ideas that ForCES has
matured over the years. Remember there were at least 4 variants of things
that claimed to be ForCES that influenced the current architecture and model;
so weve taken care of a lot of use cases over the years.

I am also aware of at least one issue that some OF experts have expressed
in private that ForCES cant do (in regards to modelling parallel LFB flow
where you have a single packet being processed in parallel by multiple
LFB instances). There may be more.

The OF LFBs draft from Evangelos and company demonstrate it is possible to
model OF using the ForCES language.

Is there a way we can extend an olive branch to the ONF folks to have
them use ForCES and given the new approach of allowing new work in,
accommodate any new features they are missing?

cheers,
jamal

---

From: Jamal Hadi Salim <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 12:02:34 -0400

> accommodate any new features they are missing?

Meant "Any new feature they feel we are missing"

cheers,
jamal

---

From: Susan Hares <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 13:26:53 +0000

Jamal:

I have a more basic question. 

What's wrong with my draft?  

I heard that people wanted to give me comments on the draft, but I've waited  Can I do a call to have it adopted as a working group draft? 

Sue 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jamal Hadi Salim [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 9:01 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Susan Hares
Subject: On the OF ForCES comparison

Me again.

cheers,
jamal

---

From: Jamal Hadi Salim <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 19:58:02 -0400

Hi Sue,

> What's wrong with my draft?

Nothing
[I have comments which i will send you privately when i get to type them in;
and the general feedback in the meeting was some beefing is needed.]

> I heard that people wanted to give me comments on the draft, but I've waited  Can I do a call to have it adopted >as a working group draft?

At the moment it is outside the scope of the charter.
If we can generate enough interest for OF kind of activites, it is
possible to make it a WG
doc. Can we get some of the ONF folks offended enough to show up here
at least to
comment?

cheers,
jamal