On (2013-04-02 14:47 +0200), Robert Raszuk wrote: > Oh I see ... it could be a valid case. But I am not sure why in this case > we could not just have flat single VLAN tagging for guests between hosts > and external VPN forwarder. Would you expect more then 4K (VLAN limit) to > be exceeded ? If not I guess there is no good reason for QinQ.
4k guests doesn't sounds like particularly large number of guests in external VPN forwarder scenario. Maybe I have 50 hosts with 100 guests each in my L2? > In fact if you have QinQ there the semantics of VPN label used by such VPN > forwarder would need to include direct demux for both VLAN tags wouldn't it Yes. Your server->network lookup key would be two VLANs, result would be label + oif. network->server lookup key would be label, result would be two VLANs + oif. -- ++ytti
