Hi,

I noticed this post, and wanted to give some general feedback.

First, I'm not sure I understand this as a standards-track document; it
seems more Informational at best.

Second, while the systems cited all focus on hypervisor and/or vxlan
configuration, we had a long project here at ISI that basically
accomplished most of the goals set out in this document at the IP layer.

It might be useful to take a look there; we had a discovery protocol
configuration managers, fault tolerance, etc. - and running code in
2000. That might provide an example of the kind of system you're trying
to indicate here.

The website is www.isi.edu/x-bone

Joe

On 3/20/2015 1:12 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> Dear ALL,
> 
> About the automatic VN services provisioning requirements, we’ve
> submitted a draft draft-gu-nvo3-auto-provisioning-reqs-00(and -01 with
> minor modification) to NVO3 website. We've received e-mail and oral
> responses from some experts. Their initial impression are the goal maybe
> somehow too ambitious, because of the broad domain of NVO3 VN service
> automation, including VM automatic creation and interaction with
> Virtualization orchestration system etc., but, they agree the
> requirements are good for the VN service providing.
> 
> Generally speaking, automatic service providing may be good for every
> service if it’s possible, because of: 1), quick service provision to
> customer and/or shorten the time to market; 2), less manual
> configuration  and lower operation cost; 3), eliminate the possibility
> of manual configuration errors, and so on.
> 
> So, we initiate this discussion, hope, in a narrower but still practical
> and useful scope to implement NVO3 automatic VN services provisioning.
> 
> First, we need to clarify what VN is and what kind of VN shall be
> supported in NVO3, then we will show the VN can be implemented by two
> different mechanism, in the scope of NVO3.
> 
> For what kinds of VN shall be supported, we can obtain the related
> information from the draft-ietf-nvo3-use-case-05, it includes many kinds
> of VN, we summary them as following:
> 
> 1), Virtual Network in DC (Section 2);
> 
> 2), Virtual Network accessed by enterprise network through secure
> Gateway (Section 3.1);
> 
> 3), Virtual Network accessed by enterprise network through VPN/PE
> (Section 3.2);
> 
> 4), Multiple/Multi-tier Virtual Networks (Section 4.1);
> 
> 5), Multiple Virtual Networks connected by other Virtual Network
> (Section 4.2);
> 
> 6), Multiple Virtual Networks accessed by enterprise network and
> Internet through secure Gateway (Section 4.3).
> 
> In all these typical usage scenarios, the VN can be abstracted as basic
> VN(s) and the Gateway(s). The basic VN consists of some VMs which
> connect to NVE and multiple NVE connect to each other by underlay
> network in one data center site. And the gateway may be any one or
> combination of NAT, firewall, secure gateway, load balancer, etc.
> 
> For virtual network automatic provisioning, if the basic VN(s) and the
> Gateway(s) can be automatically created(and automatically connected)
> then the VN can be automatic provided.
> 
> For Gateway automatic provisioning, we already know that the firewall or
> NAT or Gateway can be virtualized to support lots of virtual devices on
> these devices, so we can define some interface to distribute the
> automatic creation command to these devices to realize the gateway
> automatic provision.
> 
> One method is, it can be done or supported by using the NVE-NVA
> protocol, because the gateway and the NVE can be resided in the same
> datacenter gateway generally. Please note that this may need more
> investigation and may be out of the NVO3 scope.
> 
> For basic VN automatic creation, we have proposed the NVE auto-discovery
> protocol to support VM automatic join the VN. [For simplicity, and it’s
> reasonable, we assume that VM is prepared by Hypervisor and is ready
> been configured with some basic parameters such as MAC address and/or IP
> address or VLAN-ID etc.]
> 
> For other VM/Hypervisor-NVE protocol candidate, e.g. VDP, it can also be
> extended to support VM automatically join the VN.
> 
> The main point of this method is, using reserved VDP TLV Type to define
> some associate commands with auto join VN commands; or using a new
> filter information format to define this function, e.g. automatic join
> the VN, for the existing associate commands.
> 
> When the EVB bridge, which also works as NVE, received the extended VDP
> commands it associates the VSI with a SBP, and further to create VN
> context for the VN which the VM wants to join, if the VN context does
> not exist; and further create an entry for the VM in the VRF, if this
> entry does not exists. The associate can be done by choosing one SBP
> from the SBP list which are configured by network administrator for
> automatic service provisioning purposes.
> 
> After that, the NVE using NVE-NVA protocol to synchronize with other
> NVEs in the same VN to realize the VN.
> 
> So we have two different mechanisms to realize the automatic VN
> provisioning.
> 
> Based on above discussion, we suggest the working group accept the VN
> automatic service provision requirements.
> 
> Any comments or suggestions?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> Zhongyu
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
> 

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

Reply via email to