Thinks like tenant virtualization local VLAN assignments are already provided today by DC orchestration system when the VM is created. I do not think that asking NVE TOR for this information as well as other network information of VMs is a good direction at all.
[Xiaohu] I have the same concern. If somebody believes it's worthwhile to pursue this direction, It would be better to prove what distinct advantages this NVE-ToR signalling can provide compared to the orchestration system based approach. In addition, I disgree to the claim made in this draft that ARP is not a starting point. If the VM profile has already been provisioned by some means, e.g., using the orchestration system, the gratuitous ARP packet generated by the moved VM could actually be interpreted as a notification of VM attachment event. As for the claim that ARP can not realize VM detachment notification, IMHO, it heavily depends on what specific NV technology is used. Take the VPLS as an example, the flooding of the gratiutous ARP packet could be interpreted by the old NVE to which the moved VM was previously attached as a implicit withdraw. Best regards, Xiaohu Best regards, R. _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
