Re: [spp] secondary applications

[Yasufumi Ogawa <ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp>]

On 2018/02/22 20:53, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> Hi Yasufumi,
> 
> For primary process there is single binary, but for secondary there are three now:
> nfv
> vf
> vm
> 
> and from their name it is not clear what they are for and what is the difference.
SPP was started as a trial PoC app and name convention was not 
considered well. I think it must be revised.

> 
> Do you know what is the difference between them?
nfv and vm are simply forwarding and almost same but different for 
running on host or guest. In addition, vm behaves as secondary but 
implemented as primary in guest actually.

On the other hand, vf is including worker thread for classifying or 
merging packets for more realistic usecases.
> 
> 
> And does it make sense to merge them into single binary, to escape from
> maintaining three different binaries? Or can we eliminate some?
I think vf might be merged to nfv. I agree with you to reduce 
maintaining costs, so I'd like to try to consider it.

I have already refactored spp.py first because all of classes and 
methods are included in one file which makes maintaining so hard, and 
usability is poor. After done refactoring spp.py, I will start 
refactoring for secondary including name convention.

Thanks
> 
> Thanks,
> ferruh
> 
> 


-- 
Yasufumi Ogawa
NTT Network Service Systems Labs