Re: [nvo3] Is there any difference between "Network Virtualization Overlay" and "Network Overlay"?

Hi, You might want to take a look at segment routing. Regards, Jeff On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:03 PM, "Eric Gray" wrote: > Jon, > >I likely introduced some confusion into this by misnaming the IP option I > meant to refer to > when I said "IP explicit routing" - I meant "IP Source Routing" w

Re: [nvo3] The possibility of using global MPLS labels as VNIs ... for l3vpn

+1 Regards, Jeff On Jul 23, 2013, at 7:46 AM, "Kireeti Kompella" wrote: > Hi Xuxiaohu, > > Sorry for the previous empty email. > > On Jul 23, 2013, at 4:51, Xuxiaohu wrote: > >> The reason that I started this discussion is to make sure whether the >> Virtual Network Context Identificatio

Re: [nvo3] I-D Action: draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe-00.txt

That¹s why we have been using entropy labels, ingress node has the best understanding of the context. Cheers, Jeff -Original Message- From: Joe Touch Date: Monday, May 4, 2015 at 4:51 PM To: Ian Cox , "sarik...@ieee.org" , "nvo3@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [nvo3] I-D Action: draft-ietf-nv

Re: [nvo3] 答复: 答复: VxLAN Security Consideration

Agree! One of the most significant reasons to deploy VxLAN is hashed source UDP port used to enrich entropy on transit. Cheers, Jeff From: Stephen Suryaputra mailto:stephen.suryaputra@gmail.com>> Reply-To: "ssu...@ieee.org" mailto:ssu...@ieee.org>> Date: Wednesday,

Re: [nvo3] draft-­-pang-­-nvo3-­-vxlan-­-path-­-detection-­-01

Hi, Going back to more fundamental problem – unpredictability. It is not uncommon to have 64-128 ways ECMP between source and destination VTEP’s across IP fabric. In order to exercise every possible path enough entropy (in this case – UDP source port) has to be created by the sending VTEP, while

Re: [nvo3] Give the introduction of CUSP design team and Solicit comments for all the related drafts of CU-seperated BNG

Hi Rong, Are you planning to provide an update at IETF100? Regards, Jeff > On Oct 28, 2017, at 17:42, 顾 戎 wrote: > > Hi, dear all. > > Recently we have submitted several drafts on CU-separated BNG device. As > CU-separated BNG is a bandnew architecture with a control plane (BNG-CP) and > u

Re: [nvo3] working group adoption poll on draft-rabadan-nvo3-evpn-applicability

Sam, Well written and useful document, support! Cheers, Jeff From: nvo3 on behalf of Sam Aldrin Date: Tuesday, July 3, 2018 at 6:30 PM To: "nvo3@ietf.org" Cc: "draft-rabadan-nvo3-evpn-applicabil...@ietf.org" , "nvo3-cha...@ietf.org" Subject: [nvo3] working group adoption poll on d

Re: [nvo3] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-xiao-nvo3-bfd-geneve-03

Matthew, I support the adoption of the draft as co-author and not aware of any relevant IPR. Regards, Jeff > On Oct 15, 2020, at 08:42, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) > wrote: > >  > This email begins a two-week poll for adoption of > draft-xiao-nvo3-bfd-geneve-03.txt in the NVO3 working grou

Re: [nvo3] Second Working Group Last call for draft-ietf-nvo3-encap

Yes/support > On Jul 1, 2021, at 8:09 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) > wrote: > > This email begins a two-week working group last call for > draft-ietf-nvo3-encap-06. > > Please review the draft and post any comments to the NVO3 working group list. > If you have read the latest version of

Re: [nvo3] Working Group Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-nvo3-bfd-geneve

Matthew, As a co-autor, I am not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft. I support publication of this document as the standard track RFC. Cheers, Jeff > On Oct 6, 2022, at 03:30, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) > wrote: > >  > This email begins a two-week working group last call for > dr

Re: [nvo3] Working Group Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam-07

Hi Sam,The draft is in a good shape, I support publication of the draft and have no technical comments.Cheers,JeffOn Jun 27, 2023, at 23:27, Sam Aldrin wrote:This email begins a two-week working group last call for draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam-07 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nvo3-ge