I read through draft-yizhou-anima-l2-acp-based-ani-00.txt. I don't really understand the applicability.
It says:
> However
> there are some cases which require L2 ACP functions in ANI. The L2
> ACP is used in such cases that the managed network is a reletively
> small layer 2 network where the network nodes have no L3 physical
> interfaces and the network manager would like to use and verify the
> L2 topology and reachability first for some management purpose.
The claim is that there are no L3 "physical interfaces"
I don't really know what means.
How is management done? I guess that there is no SNMP, no SSH, no YANG, and
no web interface into these devices?
Many of the L1 DWDM devices that I have worked with have managment interfaces
that provide all of these L3 kind of things
(Some don't: They are purely physical/optical devices with no management at
all.)
> In SOHO or SMB case, the network is not large and the network nodes
> have less resource. They are pure layer 2 nodes or nodes to be
> enrolled as layer 2 first to form the initial simple topology for
> cabling verification. In this case, autonomic network management
> with the layer 2 network nodes is required. Figure 1 shows a typical
> example of layer 2 network.
>
> For small branch, the number of hosts is usually less than 200, and
> the number of WiFi AP and access switches are both less than 10.
SOHO/SMB cases do not have 200 hosts. They have 20 hosts max,
with a single AP, and every single one (the one) of the "switches" has an L3
interface on which there is a web interface.
For a small branch office, those numbers seem reasonable, but I think that
every single one of those devices has a L3 management interface.
While there are many L2/L3 1/10/100Gbps switches have a 100Mb/s L3-only
management for an OOB network connection, they are all capable of having a
management L3 interface attached to any of the L2 "VLANs" which may be
created. Some are annoying/stupid, and can only attach to vlan1, but that's
increasingly uncommon.
So:
1) I agree that we need an ACP discovery (DULL) mechanism that does not
rely on broadcast frames.
2) I also agree that some links might benefit from using MACsec rather than
IPsec for seperation across the physical links.
Both of these mechanisms will reveal the state of L2 connectivity.
I do not agree that we need any kind of L2-ACP. We don't need to move
ethernet frames around like this. Anyway, I think 802.1q already provides
for that. yeah, STP sucks. Don't use STP with redundant voice links.
For management links, it is okay. It's just really hard to debug.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
