Benson,
I've got a bit of experience when it comes to drafting WG charters. :-)
Especially when working on the milestones, it helps to envision the
expectations for the documents that will be produced by the WG, as there
tends to be a direct correspondence between documents and milestones, so
that
Dave,
It's not really what we think of as a "framework" document, as it contains
normative language, framework documents are usually informative in nature
and used to set the stage for solution drafts.
I also agree with Tom that it's more about address mobility than just VM
mobility, which is an
Chairs,
Bhumip requested WG adoption of this draft almost two months ago, and it's
since been revised to respond to comments and align it with the
architecture. The draft specifies important functionality for the data
center. Can some action be taken on this, or a response as to why not?
Thanks,
Saumya,
No, Gratuitous ARP is used to update the other ARP tables when a VM moves.
RARP was used to request your own IP address when you don’t know it, but is
obsolete, and anyway, the VM already knows its IP address (see section 8 in
the draft).
Cheers,
Andy
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Sau
t I think still used.
> Whats happens in a case where VM is migrated to DC-network (may be across
> geographies and NVO domains) where the IP is already assigned
> to another VM/entity
>
> Thanks
> Saumya.
>
> From: "Andrew G. Malis"
> Date: Monday, Mar
Matthew,
I have read the darft, and I believe that it’s useful to permanently
document the rationale and requirements behind the normative drafts coming
out of the WG. I think the information would get scattered, lost or
overlooked if buried in the back of other drafts.
Cheers,
Andy
On Fri, Aug
Matthew,
I’ve read the draft and believe that it is ready to be published as an
informational RFC.
Thanks,
Andy
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
matthew.bo...@nokia.com> wrote:
> This email begins a two week working group last call for
> draft-ietf-nvo3-use-case-09
Support.
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)
wrote:
> All,
>
> At the Vancouver IETF, there was considerable support for adopting
> draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement-03 as an NVO3 working group
> document. However, there was also some support for
> draft-fang-vpn4
Sorry for the delayed reply, this draft is already very well developed, and
I support its adoption by the WG.
Cheers,
Andy
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
matthew.bo...@nokia.com> wrote:
> This email begins a two week poll for adoption of
> draft-sarikaya-nvo3-vm
I also support adoption of the draft.
Cheers,
Andy
On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 11:33 AM, Greg Mirsky wrote:
> Dear All,
> I support NVO3 WG adoption of this draft. It is well-written and does
> provide important information about practices that enable VM mobility in DC
> networks.
>
> Regards,
> Gr
Dale,
Ethertypes are allocated not by IANA, but IEEE. See
https://standards.ieee.org/develop/regauth/ethertype/ for further
information.
Cheers,
Andy
On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 4:15 AM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> The concept of Geneve as a generalized encapsulation technique -- or
> even the concep
Hi, I also support adoption of the draft.
I do have a couple of small comments on Figure 2 that can be addressed
following adoption. First, the IP addresses for CPE10 wrapped to the next
line. Second, It would be better to show the IPSec tunnel between CPE1 and
CPE10 (matching the text in section
12 matches
Mail list logo
