On 7/23/2015 2:45 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
We ran in to this long ago.
What are some other examples? We've be good about keeping the network L2
only. Segments, VLAN transparency, and other properties of the network are
all L2.
The example you gave about needing the network to see the grouping of
subnets isn't the network leaking into L3, it's subnets requiring an L2
container. Networks don't depend on subnets, subnets depend on networks. I
would rather look at making that dependency nullable and achieving your
grouping another way (e.g. subnetpool).
I think Kevin is right here. Network is fundamentally a layer 2
construct, it represents direct reachability. A network could in
principle support non-IP traffic (though in practice that may or may not
work depending on underlying implementation.) Subnet is fundamentally a
layer 3 construct it represents addressing for traffic that may need to
flow between different networks (quite literally, that's where the name
*inter*net protocol comes from.)
Because there is often a 1:1 relationship between network and subnet
it's easy to blur the distinction, but I think it's worth keeping the
concepts clear. An address scope or supernet (in the specific meaning of
a summarized collection of subnets (e.g. a /23 made up of 8 /26s)) is a
more accurate conceptual representation of multiple L2 segments with
routing between them.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
