My point would be that introducing additional complexity in an overlay should have a use case associate with it. It would not be something you would do gratuitously....
SO I'm looking for the draft to provide a use case for this vs. simply mentioning subnetting without any context :) Cheers Dave From: nvo3 [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Touch Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 5:07 PM To: David Allan I <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [nvo3] FW: Call for interest on NVO3 use case draft On 8/12/2016 4:16 PM, David Allan I wrote: 4.2 Why I would subnet my overlay could use some explanation. I normally think of subnetting as a convenient address summarization technique dependent on topology, and with an overlay I don't have a topology. The topology of an overlay is determined by its tunnels, just as the topology of the underlying net is determined by its links. A subnet in an overlay corresponds either to a single multipoint tunnel or to a set of tunnels that transparently acts as such - just as a subnet in the Internet base network corresponds to a shared access link or a set of links that transparently act as such (e.g., switched ethernet). Joe
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
