Hi Anoop,
thank you for the great text you've contributed. Accepted. I'll update the
working text and publish later today.

Kind regards,
Greg

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 5:19 AM Reshad Rahman (rrahman) <rrah...@cisco.com>
wrote:

> +1 to Anoop's comments. I've made similar comment to Greg privately, and
> Anoop's proposed text clears things up.
>
> Regards,
> Reshad (no hat).
>
> ´╗┐On 2018-12-19, 1:54 AM, "Rtg-bfd on behalf of Anoop Ghanwani" <
> rtg-bfd-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of an...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:
>
>     Hi Greg,
>
>     Yes this captures what I was trying to get added.
>
>     Perhaps the last sentence can be changed to:
>
>     "This document is written assuming the use of VXLAN for virtualized
>     hosts and refers to VMs and VTEPs in hypervisors.  However, the
>     concepts are equally applicable to non-virtualized hosts attached to
>     VTEPs in switches."
>
>     Thanks,
>     Anoop
>
>     On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:17 PM Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>     >
>     > Hi Anoop,
>     > thank you for your comments and the suggested text. To clarify the
> extent of the update, would the following accurately reflect the change in
> Introduction you're proposing:
>     > OLD TEXT:
>     >    VXLAN is typically deployed in data centers interconnecting
>     >    virtualized hosts of a tenant.  VXLAN addresses requirements of
> the
>     >    Layer 2 and Layer 3 data center network infrastructure in the
>     >    presence of VMs in a multi-tenant environment, discussed in
> section 3
>     >    [RFC7348], by providing Layer 2 overlay scheme on a Layer 3
> network.
>     > NEW TEXT:
>     >   One use of VXLAN is in data centers interconnecting
>     >   VMs of a tenant.  VXLAN addresses requirements of the
>     >    Layer 2 and Layer 3 data center network infrastructure in the
>     >    presence of VMs in a multi-tenant environment, discussed in
> section 3
>     >    of [RFC7348], by providing Layer 2 overlay scheme on a Layer 3
> network.
>     >    Another use is as an encapsulation for EVPN [RFC 8365].
>     >
>     >   In the remainder of this document the terms VM and End Station
>     >   are used interchangeably.
>     >
>     > If my understanding of the proposed update is correct, I'd be glad
> to use it (adding RFC 8365 as Informational reference).  Should note that
> in the draft we never used "End Station". Perhaps the last sentence is not
> required.
>     >
>     > What do you think?
>     >
>     > Regards,
>     > Greg
>     >
>     > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:08 AM Anoop Ghanwani <
> an...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> I would change the introduction to the following to mention the use
> of
>     >> VXLAN by BGP EVPN.
>     >>
>     >> Thanks,
>     >> Anoop
>     >>
>     >> ==
>     >>
>     >>    "Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network" (VXLAN) [RFC7348]
> provides
>     >>    an encapsulation scheme that allows building an overlay network
> by
>     >>    decoupling the address space of the attached virtual hosts from
> that
>     >>    of the network.
>     >>
>     >>   One use of VXLAN is in data centers interconnecting
>     >>   VMs of a tenant.  VXLAN addresses requirements of the
>     >>    Layer 2 and Layer 3 data center network infrastructure in the
>     >>    presence of VMs in a multi-tenant environment, discussed in
> section 3
>     >>    of [RFC7348], by providing Layer 2 overlay scheme on a Layer 3
> network.
>     >>    Another use is as an encapsulation for EVPN [RFC 8365].
>     >>
>     >>   In the remainder of this document the terms VM and End Station
>     >>   are used interchangeably.
>     >>
>     >>    In the absence of a router in the overlay, a VM can communicate
> with
>     >>    another VM only if they are on the same VXLAN segment.  VMs are
>     >>    unaware of VXLAN tunnels as a VXLAN tunnel is terminated on a
> VXLAN
>     >>    Tunnel End Point (VTEP) (hypervisor/TOR).  VTEPs
> (hypervisor/TOR) are
>     >>    responsible for encapsulating and decapsulating frames exchanged
>     >>    among VMs.
>     >>
>     >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 6:02 AM Jeffrey Haas <jh...@pfrc.org>
> wrote:
>     >> >
>     >> > BESS Working Group members,
>     >> >
>     >> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-04
>     >> >
>     >> > BFD has finished working group last call on BFD for Vxlan and is
> about ready
>     >> > to request publication as an RFC.  A last minute comment
> suggested that we
>     >> > should consider inviting comment from your working group for
> expertise.
>     >> >
>     >> > We will be leaving the last call open until December 21 to leave
> time for
>     >> > final comments.
>     >> >
>     >> > -- Jeff (for BFD)
>     >> >
>     >> > _______________________________________________
>     >> > BESS mailing list
>     >> > BESS@ietf.org
>     >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>     >>
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> BESS mailing list
>     >> BESS@ietf.org
>     >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Reply via email to