I share my view.

The current architecture document is more focusing on NVE-NVA interface and 
assumes that NVA is able to obtain all VN and/or address mapping information’s 
that an NVE needs. That does implicitly indicate that no control plane protocol 
is needed between NVEs. (NVE-NVE data plane protocol is still needed).  From 
the architecture perspective, if it allows the control plane protocol exist 
both between NVE-NVA and NVE-NVE, it may lead very complex solution and many 
operation issue; it has to resolve which information NVE should trust or use, 
i.e. from NVA or from NVE.

Weather this means excluding TRILL or SPB, it is debatable. The current charter 
clearly states that NVO3 targets network virtualization over IP network. Beyond 
this point, TRILL has directory based solution, which fits into NVE-NVA 
architecture.  SPB also have SPB-EVPN solution that also aligns with NVE-NVA 
architecture.

IMO: NVE-NVA based control plane architecture and NVE-NVE based control plane 
architecture are both possible for NVO3, but not the combined architecture. As 
you said, it is true that NVE-NVE based architecture is useful in some small 
applications.  Since TRILL and SBP already address it, NVO3 should only focus 
on the NVE-NVA based architecture. One of NVO3 goal is the scalability.

Lucy

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Xuxiaohu
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:58 AM
To: Bocci, Matthew (Matthew); [email protected]
Subject: [nvo3] 答复: Poll for WG adoption and IPR check for 
draft-narten-nvo3-arch-01.txt

Hi all,

In the current arch draft, there is no mention of NVE-NVE protocol. Does it 
mean that there is no need for direct exchange of VN and/or address mapping 
information between NVEs? If so, Does it mean that the control plane mechanisms 
used by TRILL or SPB which depend on the NVE-NVE interaction are not suitable 
for multi-tenant data center networks anymore, leaving aside whether the 
underlay is IP or not.

IMHO, the NVE-NVE protocol is still useful in some small and medium sized 
multi-tenant data center networks. AFAIK, most tenants within public cloud data 
centers are small and medium sized enterprises which usually don’t need a lot 
of VMs. That means the number of NVEs for most VNs would not be very large 
especially in the case where the NVE is deployed at physical switches, rather 
than hypervisors/servers. In this case, the VN membership can be discovered via 
IGP flooding and the address mapping information of a given VN could be 
directly exchanged among NVEs of that VN, without a need for a dedicated NVA.

Best regards,
Xiaohu

发件人: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 
[mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)
发送时间: 2013年11月13日 21:58
收件人: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
主题: [nvo3] Poll for WG adoption and IPR check for draft-narten-nvo3-arch-01.txt

This email begins a two week poll to help the chairs judge if there is 
consensus  to adopt draft-narten-nvo3-arch-01.txt as an NVO3 working group 
draft.

Please respond to this email on the list with 'support' or 'do not support'.

Please also send any comments on the draft to the NVO3 list.

Please consider whether this draft takes the right basic approach, and is a 
good basis for the work going forward (and potential future rechartering). It 
does not have to be perfect at this stage.

Coincidentally, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to 
this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR 
rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to this 
email whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not be 
adopted until a response has been received from each author and contributor.

If you are on the NVO3 WG email list but are not listed as an author or 
contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR 
that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.

This poll closes on Friday 29th November 2013.

Regards

Matthew and Benson

_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

Reply via email to