What overhead? Look at variant 1.
IMO, it is not useful to take on a new WG item that directly competes with an existing one that is a superset already. Joe > On May 16, 2018, at 8:22 PM, 徐小虎(义先) <[email protected]> wrote: > > It doesn't matter whether or not it's already there. IMHO, given the > popularity of different overlay technologies such as VXLAN and MPLS-in-UDP in > practice, GUE initially and mainly targeted as a DC overlay approach has > little change to be widely deployed within data centers. > > As such, if the only possible applicability of GUE is for directly carrying > IP over UDP, I don't understand why we need such a overhead associated with > the variation of GUE. In another word, why not directly assign a port to > indicate IP-in-UDP, instead of using the GUE protocol variant number to > indicate. By the way, this the GUE protocol variant number usage reminds me > of the notorious misuse of the first nibble of the MPLS payload to indicate > the type of the MPLS payload:) > > Xiaohu > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > From:Joe Touch <[email protected]> > Send Time:2018年5月16日(星期三) 15:45 > To:徐小虎(义先) <[email protected]> > Cc:Tom Herbert <[email protected]>; Internet Area <[email protected]>; > intarea-chairs <[email protected]>; draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp > <[email protected]> > Subject:Re: [Int-area] 回复： Request a WG adoption call for > draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp > > It’s not complex. It’s already there. So there continues to be no reason to > waste either a port number or further time discussing this draft. > > Joe > > On May 15, 2018, at 9:01 PM, 徐小虎(义先) <[email protected]> wrote: > > IMHO，there seems no need to introduce such complexity into GUE just for the > purpose of saving one port number. > > Xiaohu > > > > > > 来自钉钉专属商务邮箱 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > 发件人：Tom Herbert<[email protected]> > 日 期：2018年05月16日 11:55:49 > 收件人：徐小虎(义先)<[email protected]> > 抄 送：Erik Kline<[email protected]>; Internet Area<[email protected]>; > draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp<[email protected]>; > intarea-chairs<[email protected]> > 主 题：Re: [Int-area] Request a WG adoption call for draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:33 PM, 徐小虎(义先) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > > > Good question. This draft (draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp) describes a native > > UDP encapsulation scheme for IP packets, which is straightforward and > > light-weighted, just as MPLS-in-UDP [RFC7510] and TRILL-in-UDP > > (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-16#page-20) and etc. > > > GUE variant 1 implements native UDP encapsulation for IPv4 and IPv6. > Except for a different port number, there is no protocol difference > between that and doing IP in UDP as separate protocol. > > Tom > > > > Best regards, > > Xiaohu > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > From:Erik Kline <[email protected]> > > Send Time:2018年5月16日(星期三) 11:07 > > To:徐小虎(义先) <[email protected]> > > Cc:intarea-chairs <[email protected]>; > > draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp <[email protected]>; > > Internet Area <[email protected]> > > Subject:Re: [Int-area] Request a WG adoption call for > > draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp > > > > Should this document make some comment about its relation, or lack of > > relation, to https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-gue ? > > On Wed, 16 May 2018 at 11:53, 徐小虎(义先) <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi co-chairs, > > > >> We would like to request a WG adoption call for this draft ( > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-07) since it has > > been stable enough and the solution as described in this draft is needed in > > practice. > > > >> Best regards, > >> Xiaohu (on behalf of all co-authors) > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Int-area mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Int-area mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area > > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
