On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:22 PM, 徐小虎(义先) <xiaohu....@alibaba-inc.com>
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:)
>
>
I agree and support the adoption.

I supported GUE in the past.
Why not have another way of UDP encapsulation with the possibility of a
different area of applicability?

Regards,
Behcet

> Xiaohu
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> From:Joe Touch <to...@strayalpha.com>
> Send Time:2018年5月16日(星期三) 15:45
> To:徐小虎(义先) <xiaohu....@alibaba-inc.com>
> Cc:Tom Herbert <t...@herbertland.com>; Internet Area <int-area@ietf.org>;
> intarea-chairs <intarea-cha...@tools.ietf.org>;
> draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp <draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-...@tools.ietf.org>
> 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) <xiaohu....@alibaba-inc.com> 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 <http://(null)>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 发件人:Tom Herbert<t...@herbertland.com>
> 日 期:2018年05月16日 11:55:49
> 收件人:徐小虎(义先)<xiaohu....@alibaba-inc.com>
> 抄 送:Erik Kline<e...@google.com>; Internet Area<int-area@ietf.org>;
> draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp<draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-...@tools.ietf.org>;
> intarea-chairs<intarea-cha...@tools.ietf.org>
> 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) <xiaohu....@alibaba-inc.com>
> 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 <e...@google.com>
> > Send Time:2018年5月16日(星期三) 11:07
> > To:徐小虎(义先) <xiaohu....@alibaba-inc.com>
> > Cc:intarea-chairs <intarea-cha...@tools.ietf.org>;
> > draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp <draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-...@tools.ietf.org>;
> > Internet Area <int-area@ietf.org>
> > 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) <xiaohu....@alibaba-inc.com>
> > 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
> >> Int-area@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Int-area mailing list
> > Int-area@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>
>
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to