[Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification_of_Requirements
Pasi Vaananen
pvaanane at redhat.com
Tue Jun 26 13:00:57 UTC 2018
True - not everything is rackmount, not even in the network side. And,
the depth and therefore volume / power of the one "standard" RU varies
by at least a factor of two to four between the sites where RUs are
considered to be somewhat relevant.
As this discussion is about SW aspects of the system, not how about
build and package hardware, we do not need to / should not focus on the
nebulous things like RUs as a metric - but number of independent nodes
per installation site (it does not matter how the stuff gets packaged,
but what it is - and even on the 1RU, one can easily package anything
from one to two 2-skt servers and much more of the say Xeon-D's or ARM
SoCs in given space / power envelope).
Pasi
On 06/26/2018 08:50 AM, Éric Sarault wrote:
>
> Yes, in some scenarios, we need to consider CPE units. This could be a
> consumer endpoint device/appliance that looks like your typical router
> from your ISV. These are typically ARM based units or you could also
> see some Intel Xeon-D units there (Atom worst case). The use case
> behind is to manage tens of thousands of these as an edge federation.
> At the same scale, think also Industrial IoT or Retail. My point is
> not everything is a rackmount format so we just need to be clear what
> the target is here as the form factor might limit the versatility of
> one or many use cases.
>
>
>
> *---*
>
> *Eric Sarault, B. Eng.*
>
> Software Product Manager
>
> *Kontron – An S&T Company*
>
> 4555, rue Ambroise-Lafortune | Boisbriand (Quebec) J7H 0A4 | Canada
>
> P: +1 (450) 437-5682 x
>
> eric.sarault at kontron.com <mailto:eric.sarault at kontron.com>
>
>
> *Website* <http://www.kontron.com/>*| **Blog*
> <http://blog.kontron.com/>*| **Twitter*
> <https://twitter.com/Kontron>*| **LinkedIn*
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/kontron>*| **YouTube*
> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXkp_1gJbG0Um1vzdowlqww>*|
> **Facebook* <https://www.facebook.com/kontron>*__*
>
> *Kontron Canada Inc.*
>
> By opening this email you are agreeing to Kontron'sElectronic
> Communications Policy
> <http://www.kontron.com/additional/legal-and-copyright-information>.
>
>
>
> *From:*Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest) <gergely.csatari at nokia.com>
> *Sent:* June 26, 2018 7:09 AM
> *To:* Éric Sarault <Eric.Sarault at kontron.com>; Fu Qiao
> <fuqiao at chinamobile.com>; '赵奇慧' <zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com>;
> 'lebre.adrien' <lebre.adrien at free.fr>
> *Cc:* 'edge-computing' <edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>;
> 'paul-andre raymond' <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification_of_Requirements
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> So you mean that the minimum HW spec is smaller thean 1 unit?
>
>
>
> Br,
>
> Gerg0
>
>
>
> *From:*Éric Sarault [mailto:Eric.Sarault at kontron.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 20, 2018 3:14 PM
> *To:* Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> <gergely.csatari at nokia.com <mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com>>; Fu
> Qiao <fuqiao at chinamobile.com <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>>; '赵奇慧'
> <zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com <mailto:zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com>>;
> 'lebre.adrien' <lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>>
> *Cc:* 'edge-computing' <edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>>; 'paul-andre raymond'
> <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>>
> *Subject:* RE: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification_of_Requirements
>
>
>
> Is the purpose of limiting the small edge to 1U is to classify it as
> the CPE use case? We need to keep in mind some CPE/vCPE equipment
> isn’t even “rackmountable” so we need to keep track of this (i.e: set
> up box, ISV router).
>
>
>
> *---*
>
> *Eric Sarault, B. Eng.*
>
> Software Product Manager
>
> *Kontron – An S&T Company*
>
> 4555, rue Ambroise-Lafortune | Boisbriand (Quebec) J7H 0A4 | Canada
>
> P: +1 (450) 437-5682 x
>
> eric.sarault at kontron.com <mailto:eric.sarault at kontron.com>
>
>
> *Website* <http://www.kontron.com/>*| **Blog*
> <http://blog.kontron.com/>*| **Twitter*
> <https://twitter.com/Kontron>*| **LinkedIn*
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/kontron>*| **YouTube*
> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXkp_1gJbG0Um1vzdowlqww>*|
> **Facebook* <https://www.facebook.com/kontron>*__*
>
> *Kontron Canada Inc.*
>
> By opening this email you are agreeing to Kontron'sElectronic
> Communications Policy
> <http://www.kontron.com/additional/legal-and-copyright-information>.
>
>
>
> *From:*Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> <gergely.csatari at nokia.com <mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com>>
> *Sent:* June 20, 2018 5:36 AM
> *To:* Fu Qiao <fuqiao at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>>; '赵奇慧' <zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com>>; 'lebre.adrien'
> <lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>>
> *Cc:* 'edge-computing' <edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>>; 'paul-andre raymond'
> <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>>
> *Subject:* Re: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification_of_Requirements
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I am okay with your classification for small, medium and large.
>
>
>
> Br,
>
> Gerg0
>
>
>
> *From:*Fu Qiao [mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 20, 2018 11:29 AM
> *To:* Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> <gergely.csatari at nokia.com <mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com>>; '赵奇慧'
> <zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com <mailto:zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com>>;
> 'lebre.adrien' <lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>>
> *Cc:* 'edge-computing' <edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>>; 'paul-andre raymond'
> <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>>
> *Subject:* 答复: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复:
> Clarification_of_Requirements
>
>
>
> Hi, Georgly. I read through the wiki definition for small and medium,
> and I guess it probably is not that direct to just define a large edge
> scenario.
>
> I notice that in the medium edge, the size is 2U-20U, which actually
> include the large edge as defined in the following email. I am afraid
> we probably will need detailed discussion about the size limitation
> for each different type, so as to make this whole definition easy to
> be accept. A possible proposal could be 1U for small, 2U-20U for
> medium, and 20-100U(or even larger) for large. So the small one can
> fit for CPE, medium one can fit for access and counties, and large one
> can fit for counties and cities
>
>
>
>
>
> *发件人**:*Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> [mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com]
> *发送时间**:*2018年6月20日17:18
> *收件人**:*Fu Qiao <fuqiao at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>>; '赵奇慧' <zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com>>; 'lebre.adrien'
> <lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>>
> *抄送**:*'edge-computing' <edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>>; 'paul-andre raymond'
> <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>>
> *主题**:*RE: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification_of_Requirements
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
>
>
> I’m okay to add a large edge deployment scenario.
>
>
>
> What charasterestics should it have?
>
> * Minimum hardware specs: 10 units
> * Maximum hardware specs: 20 units
> * Physical access of maintainer:
> * Physical security:
> * Expected frequency of updates to hardware:
> * Expected frequency of updates to firmware:
> * Expected frequency of updates to control systems (e.g. OpenStack
> or Kubernetes controllers):
> * Remote access/connectivity reliability (24/24, periodic, ...):
> * Physical size:
> * Number of instances (Edge TIC Country / Edge TIC AP according to
> ^[6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>
> ):
> * Distance from Base Station (Access-level DC according to ^[6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>
> ):
> * E2E delay (from UE to site) (Access according to ^[6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>
> ):
> * Bandwith need (Access according to ^[6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>
> ):
>
> Br,
>
> Gerg0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*Fu Qiao [mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 20, 2018 10:59 AM
> *To:* Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> <gergely.csatari at nokia.com <mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com>>; '赵奇慧'
> <zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com <mailto:zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com>>;
> 'lebre.adrien' <lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>>
> *Cc:* 'edge-computing' <edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>>; 'paul-andre raymond'
> <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>>
> *Subject:* 答复: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复:
> Clarification_of_Requirements
>
>
>
> Hi, Gergely. Actually what I am thinking is we probably need more
> definition for edge scenarios.
>
> I think the definition for small edge and medium edge in the white
> paper make sense to me, since they basically cover the usecase for
> customer premises usecases. However, I guess another scenario should
> also be added which includes 10-20 units. Such scenario is what we say
> for access and county level. Such unit is not that resource limited as
> small and medium edge, but we should also consider the resource
> constrains and make fully use of the limited resource.
>
> As for city level, I understand we can probably use the large edge
> definition for this, since it could be a quite typical cloud at that
> level.
>
> Hope this will help.
>
>
>
> *发件人**:*Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> [mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com]
> *发送时间**:*2018年6月20日16:49
> *收件人**:*Fu Qiao <fuqiao at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>>; '赵奇慧' <zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com>>; 'lebre.adrien'
> <lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>>
> *抄送**:*'edge-computing' <edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>>; 'paul-andre raymond'
> <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>>
> *主题**:*RE: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification_of_Requirements
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
>
>
> I’m not sure at all, that we follow the definitions from the
> whitepaper in the wiki 😊
>
>
>
> I referred your talk and the naming you user there becouse of the
> differences in the definitions.
>
>
>
> Going inline.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*Fu Qiao [mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 20, 2018 4:12 AM
>
> Hi, all. I guess some more explanations for the China Mobile’s network
> should be added here.
>
> The definition for small and medium edge from the whitepaper actually
> is different from what we say about access/county/city. Our access
> level CO will include compute nodes of about ten more, with distance
> from the Base station of 10km, delay about 2ms, and bandwidth about 50GB.
>
>
>
> [G0]: Should I add 10 units to the maximum hardware specs part of the
> Small edge deployment option?
>
>
>
> Our county level CO includes tens of compute nodes, with distance of
> 50km, delay about 2.5ms, and bandwidth of about 100GB. City level CO
> will have hundreds of servers, with distance of more than 100km.
>
> I guess the small edge defined in the Whitepaper, with up to 1U, is
> somehow suitable for edge equipment at the customer site, and this is
> not actually discussed in my presentation.
>
>
>
>
>
> *发件人**:*赵奇慧[mailto:zhaoqihui at chinamobile.com]
> *发送时间**:*2018年6月20日10:03
>
> Hi Gergely,
>
>
>
> It's great that our data can help. But I think according the the
> previous definitions of small edge and medium edge, there should be a
> little modification here.
>
>
>
> For Small edge, the maximum hardware specs is up to 1 unit, which is
> similar to our Access-level DC/Edge TIC AP. For Mediun edge, the
> hardware spec varies from 2RU to 20RU, which is somehow like our
> County-level DC. So here is my suggestion:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Small edge:
>
> · Number of instances (Edge TIC AP according to [6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>):
> depend on demands
>
> [G0]: Can we say 3000+ here in a paranthesis?
>
> · Distance from Base Station (Access-level DC according to [6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>):
> around 10km
>
> · E2E delay (from UE to site)(Access according to [6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>):
> 2 ms
>
> · Bandwith need (Access according to [6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>):
> 50 GB
>
>
>
> Medium edge:
>
> · Number of instances (Edge TIC County according to [6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>):
> 3000+
>
> · Distance from Base Station (Access-level DC according to [6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>):
> around 50km
>
> · E2E delay (from UE to site) (Access according to [6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>):
> less than 2.5 ms
>
> · Bandwith need (Access according to [6]
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#cite_note-Edge_TIC:_Future_edge_cloud_for_China_Mobile-6>):
> 100GB
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> [G0]: I’ve updated these to the wiki.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gerg0
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Qihui Zhao
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> /China Mobile Research Institute///
>
> /Department of Network Technology///
>
>
>
> 发件人: Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> <mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com>
>
> 时间: 2018/06/15(星期五)22:14
>
> 收件人: lebre.adrien <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>;
>
> 抄送人: paul-andre raymond
> <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>;edge-computing
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>;
>
> 主题: Re: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification_of_Requirements
>
> Hi,
>
> I was thinking about the generic deployment specific requirements,
> like bandwiths and delays.
>
> I've added some of them from the CM presentation to
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#Small_edge
> and
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#Medium_edge
>
> Br,
> Gerg0
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>
> [mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr]
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 11:39 PM
> To: Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest) <gergely.csatari at nokia.com
> <mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com>>
> Cc: Arkady Kanevsky <Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com
> <mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com>>; fuqiao at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>; paul-andre raymond
> <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com
> <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>>;
> edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification of Requirements
>
> Hi all,
>
> Maybe we can try to prioritise the projects we want to investigate and
> then for each of them identify what are the missing
> elements/capabilities (one after the others)
>
> There are ongoing works on Keystone and Glance.
> Nova, Neutron could be the next ones because these 4 services would
> allow to deploy VM at the edge (and so containers inside VMs).
> Cinder will enable the use of remote attached volumes.
> Ironic can be useful later.
> etc..
>
> My two cents,
> Ad_ri3n_
>
> ----- Mail original -----
> > De: "Gergely Csatari (Nokia - HU/Budapest)"
> > <gergely.csatari at nokia.com <mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com>>
> > À: "Arkady Kanevsky" <Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com
> <mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com>>, fuqiao at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>, "paul-andre raymond"
> > <paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com
> <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>>, "lebre adrien"
> > <lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>>,
> edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > Envoyé: Mercredi 13 Juin 2018 17:38:35
> > Objet: RE: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification of Requirements
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Somehow I have a feeling that these latency requirements are related
> > to all projects, this is why they should be documented in the
> > Deployment options section.
> >
> > Br,
> > Gerg0
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com <mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com>
> [mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 4:24 PM
> > To: Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> > <gergely.csatari at nokia.com <mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com>>;
> fuqiao at chinamobile.com <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>;
> > paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com
> <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>; lebre.adrien at free.fr
> <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>;
> > edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > Subject: RE: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification of Requirements
> >
> > Gerg0,
> > I think these 3 projects are implied from the wiki requirements.
> > But it will be good to state projects that may need work explicitly.
> > Thanks,
> > Arkady
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Csatari, Gergely (Nokia - HU/Budapest)
> > [mailto:gergely.csatari at nokia.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 4:23 AM
> > To: Kanevsky, Arkady; fuqiao at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>;
> > paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com
> <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>; lebre.adrien at free.fr
> <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>;
> > edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > Subject: RE: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification of Requirements
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Should we add these to the Deployment Scenarions section of the Dublin
> > wiki [1]?
> >
> > [1]:
> >
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG#
> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_Edge_Discussions_Dublin_PTG>
> > Deployment_Scenarios
> >
> > Br,
> > Gerg0
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com <mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com>
> [mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 4:49 PM
> > To: fuqiao at chinamobile.com <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>;
> paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com <mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com>;
> > lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>;
> edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification of Requirements
> >
> > It is more than just nova to keystone.
> > We also need to consider at least neutron, glance and cinder also.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fu Qiao [mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 8:21 AM
> > To: 'Paul-Andre Raymond'; lebre.adrien at free.fr
> <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>;
> > edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > Subject: [Edge-computing] 答复: 答复: Clarification of Requirements
> >
> > Yes, 5ms is one way. But this is an assumption based on the network
> > from China Mobile. The latency will be defer if you have different
> > distance, but the calculation method is the same apparently.
> >
> > -----邮件原件-----
> > 发件人: Paul-Andre Raymond [mailto:paul-andre.raymond at b-yond.com]
> > 发送时间: 2018年6月6日21:19
> > 收件人: Fu Qiao <fuqiao at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>>; lebre.adrien at free.fr
> <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>;
> > edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > 主题: Re: [Edge-computing] 答复: Clarification of Requirements
> >
> > Should we separate two kinds of latency requirements:
> > - Federation Latency: i.e Central Keystone to Local Keystone
> > - API latency: i.e. Edge Nova to local Keystone
> >
> > Should we measure it one way or Round Trip? I assume the 5ms below is
> > one way.
> >
> >
> > Paul-André
> > --
> >
> >
> > On 6/6/18, 5:13 AM, "Fu Qiao" <fuqiao at chinamobile.com
> <mailto:fuqiao at chinamobile.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Adrien. I was just about the reply with more details.
> >
> > About latency, this as I understand is actually decided mostly by
> > the distance of the distributed cloud. So it actually decided by
> > where exactly the location Keystone would like to deploy, and
> > what is the distance expectation. Like what I explain in my
> > presentation, we plan to have keystone sitting in the city level
> > to control multi cloud in counties, and the latency will be
> > around 5ms. But again this is a certain situation for China
> > Mobile. And other operators may make the conlusion on a
> > different structure. Another thing we can do is work on
> > simulation and testing and see what kind of latency the current
> > keystone federation scheme can tolerant. This will help the
> > operators to work out there structure as well.
> >
> > About bandwidth, the impression for me is we could expect more
> > than 50GB of bandwidth for edge for 5G. And I think that is
> > enough for most of the app.
> >
> > Hope this will help.
> >
> > -----邮件原件-----
> > 发件人: lebre.adrien at free.fr <mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr>
> [mailto:lebre.adrien at free.fr]
> > 发送时间: 2018年6月6日15:25
> > 收件人: edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > 主题: Re: [Edge-computing] Clarification of Requirements
> >
> > It is rather difficult to give numbers because there are several
> > use-cases.
> > However, a good starting point can be to give a look to the
> > presentation Qiao Fu gave during the Vancouver summit:
> >
> https://www.openstack.org/videos/vancouver-2018/edge-tic-future-edge-cloud-for-china-mobile
> > There is a lot of numbers regarding the infrastructure China
> > Mobile is envisioning.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> > ad_ri3n_
> > PS: I cannot attend the meeting yesterday unfortunately but I'm
> > wondering whether the disconnection aspects have been discussed
> > (i.e. the fact that one site can be completely isolated for a
> > certain period of time due to network disconnections).
> >
> > ----- Mail original -----
> > > De: "Jess Lampe" <jess.lampe at gmail.com <mailto:jess.lampe at gmail.com>>
> > > À: edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > > Envoyé: Mercredi 6 Juin 2018 07:00:31
> > > Objet: [Edge-computing] Clarification of Requirements
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > During the call today, members of the Glance and Keystone teams
> > > requested clarity on the following areas:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > * Latency - what are the specific latency requirements that
> > > need
> > > to be met?
> > > * Bandwidth towards the edge - similarly, what are the
> > > limitations of bandwidth at the edge that we can expect?
> > > * Security - what are the specific security considerations
> > > that
> > > need to be?
> > >
> > >
> > > Please feel free to A.) contribute additional areas that need
> > > clarifying B.) clarify any of the added.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Edge-computing mailing list
> > > Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edge-computing
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Edge-computing mailing list
> > Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edge-computing
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Edge-computing mailing list
> > Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edge-computing
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Edge-computing mailing list
> > Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edge-computing
> > _______________________________________________
> > Edge-computing mailing list
> > Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edge-computing
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Edge-computing mailing list
> Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org>
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edge-computing
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Edge-computing mailing list
> Edge-computing at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edge-computing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/edge-computing/attachments/20180626/ea6feadf/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Edge-computing
mailing list