A question in line. On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Adrian Farrel <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Linda, > >> Respect your advice. However, some wording in the proposed charter are too >> ambiguous, is it the intent? >> >> For example: >> >> "An NVO3 solution (known here as a Data Center Virtual Private Network >> (DCVPN)) is a VPN that is viable across a scaling range of a few thousand VMs > to >> several million VMs running on greater than 100K physical servers." >> >> Do you mean "one VPN across a scaling range of million VMs"? or many VPNs >> combined to scale range of million VMs? > > I don't find the text ambiguous at all. You might disagree with what it says > ("a > VPN"), but you can't claim it is ambiguous. > >> Another example: >> "NVO3 will consider approaches to multi-tenancy that reside at the >> network layer rather than using traditional isolation mechanisms that rely on > the >> underlying layer 2 technology (e.g., VLANs)" >> >> "network layer" can mean different things to different people. Why not simply >> say "NV03 will consider approaches to multi-tenancy which do not rely on >> Layer > 2 >> VLANs"? > > There are also layers above the network layer. The charter rules them out of > scope. This is good. > > Stewart has clarified that "network layer" includes IP and MPLS, and that it > is > the bit of the hourglass that we all know as the network layer. >
The charter talks about > The NVO3 WG will determine which types of service are needed by > typical > DC deployments (for example, IP and/or Ethernet). I generally think of Ethernet as being Layer 2. Does this charter envision Ethernet as being part of the network layer? What was intended with having it mentioned there? Regards Marshall >> 3rd example: >> >> " The NVO3 WG will determine which types of service are needed by >> typical DC deployments" >> >> Data center provide Computing and storage services. Network facilitates the >> connection among Computing entities and storage entities. >> Why does NV03 WG need to determine what types of "services" are needed by >> typical DC deployment? >> >> Do you mean "NV03 WG will consider network deployment by typical DC"? > > I think s/services/connectivity services/ might address this issue. Although > the > examples cited (but not quoted by you) do tend to give a strong hint. > > Adrian > > _______________________________________________ > nvo3 mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
