Minor suggestion:
Was:
only supports IP traffic
Should be:
supports only IP traffic
Joe
On 9/15/2016 7:26 AM, Black, David wrote:
> Hi Suresh,
>
>> I do have a suggestion
>>
>> OLD:
>> For L3 service, VNs transport IP datagrams, and a Tenant System is
>> provided with a service that only supports IP traffic.
>>
>> NEW:
>> For L3 service, VNs are routed networks that transport IP datagrams, and a
>> Tenant System is provided with a service that only supports IP traffic.
> That's completely reasonable and appropriate - will do.
>
> Thanks, --David
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Suresh Krishnan [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:58 AM
>> To: Black, David; The IESG
>> Cc: [email protected]; Matthew Bocci; [email protected];
>> [email protected]; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: Suresh Krishnan's Discuss on draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: (with
>> DISCUSS
>> and COMMENT)
>>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> On 09/15/2016 09:26 AM, Black, David wrote:
>>> Hi Suresh,
>>>
>>> Regarding your Discuss:
>>>
>>>> * Section 3.1.2 : I am trying to understand why a minimum TTL decrement
>>>> is expected here. I think the mandated behavior is incorrect and needs to
>>>> be fixed.
>>>>
>>>> For L3 service, Tenant Systems should expect the IPv4 TTL (Time to
>>>> Live) or IPv6 Hop Limit in the packets they send to be decremented by
>>>> at least 1.
>>>>
>>>> e.g. Consider two IPv6 end systems that are connected using an L3
>>>> service. If one of them is the router and another is a host on the same
>>>> network a significant part of the Neighbor Discovery functions will stop
>>>> working if the hop limit is decremented (from 255 to 254).
>>> In that example, the two IPV6 end systems need to be connected by a
>>> virtual link that provides L2 service, e.g. to make ND and ARP work. Do
>>> you have suggestions for text to add (and where to add it) that would
>>> make this clearer?
>> I do have a suggestion
>>
>> OLD:
>> For L3 service, VNs transport IP datagrams, and a Tenant System is
>> provided with a service that only supports IP traffic.
>>
>> NEW:
>> For L3 service, VNs are routed networks that transport IP datagrams, and a
>> Tenant System is provided with a service that only supports IP traffic.
>>
>>>> * For an architecture based on tunnels I found the lack of discussion
>>>> concerning MTUs and fragmentation a bit disconcerting. Has the WG
>>>> discussed this?
>>> Well, IMHO, observing the intarea WG's level of engagement here, I
>>> don't think more "cooks" are needed on this topic . It'd be reasonable
>>> to add a sentence on this topic pointing to the intarea tunnels draft.
>> :-). Agree with you on the "too many cooks" point. Alia mentioned there is a
>> follow up draft in nvo3 that discusses the issues. So I am fine even without
>> adding a reference to the tunnels draft.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Suresh
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
