Because it isn’t different. Again, see GUE variant 1.

> On May 17, 2018, at 7:18 AM, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> 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
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to