Dear Authors, WG I reviewed the latest version 42 of the draft.
I believe the draft is ready for WGLC. Few minor comments Customers along with default route to VPC which I agree is the best method and could use prefix list filtering along with prefix limit to prevent and unwanted or unexpected flood of routes. There could be cases where the cloud is providing DMZ internet services and so default is provided by Cloud side. In this case the explicit routes must be provided by telco cloud. So in this particular case prefix limit could be used along with filtering. Another issue that may exist on cloud VPC side is cloud may only be able to consume a limited number of routes. So in that case prefix summaries and super nets can be advertised to the cloud. You already mentioned prefix limit with threshold so logging occurs and so the peer is not taken down is a good idea. This feature is supported by most all vendors. For DNS section some thoughts. Cloue providers allow the operators to give IPv4 blocks to the Cloud provider or use the cloud providers block. In either case the telco cloud can setup zone forwarding to public cloud and vice versa for resolution identical to what is done to the internet. Thanks Gyan On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 12:29 PM <internet-dra...@ietf.org> wrote: > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-42.txt is now > available. It is a work item of the Routing Area Working Group (RTGWG) WG > of > the IETF. > > Title: Dynamic Networks to Hybrid Cloud DCs: Problems and Mitigation > Practices > Authors: Linda Dunbar > Andrew G. Malis > Christian Jacquenet > Mehmet Toy > Kausik Majumdar > Name: draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-42.txt > Pages: 24 > Dates: 2025-01-17 > > Abstract: > > This document describes a set of network-related problems > enterprises face at the time of writing this document (2025) when > interconnecting their branch offices with dynamic workloads in > third-party data centers (DCs) (a.k.a. Cloud DCs). These problems > are mainly from enterprises with conventional VPN services that want > to leverage those networks (instead of altogether abandoning them). > This document also describes various mitigation practices and > actions to soften the issues induced by these problems. > > The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement/ > > There is also an HTMLized version available at: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-42 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-42 > > Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at: > rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts > > > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list -- rtgwg@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to rtgwg-le...@ietf.org >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list -- rtgwg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to rtgwg-le...@ietf.org
