Somesh, > A centralized architecture for a single domain is the way things > will be in practice (already are).
We can all speculate about how "the things will be in practice". However, in terms of how things "already are", 2547 VPNs, which are widely deployed today, are *not* based on "a centralized architecture". Yakov. > One way or the other, non-virtualized > network devices (physical switches etc) will have to fit into that > model. > > Now we can debate the definition of a domain is :) It may > be defined by the scope of a centralized control plane? > > Somesh > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Luc= > y yong > Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 8:15 AM > To: Aldrin Isaac; Kireeti Kompella > Cc: [email protected]; L3VPN; Yakov Rekhter; [email protected]; Xuxiaohu;= > Luyuan Fang (lufang); UTTARO, JAMES > Subject: Re: [nvo3] The possibility of using global MPLS labels as VNIs ...= > for l3vpn > > For distributed based architecture, the local context ID has a lot of benef= > its. For centralized (or SDN) architecture, will the global context ID have= > advance? Another way to ask this is: is distributed architecture better t= > han centralized architecture for VPN or virtual network overlay? > > Lucy > > From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:nvo3-boun= > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Aldrin Isaac > Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 8:00 AM > To: Kireeti Kompella > Cc: Luyuan Fang (lufang); L3VPN; Yakov Rekhter; [email protected]<mailto:nvo3@i= > etf.org>; Xuxiaohu; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>= > ; UTTARO, JAMES > Subject: Re: [nvo3] The possibility of using global MPLS labels as VNIs ...= > for l3vpn > > +1. > > Network operators lose flexibility with Global VNIDs. Virtual topology will= > be fine tuned on top of VNIDs by squeezing a square peg (ACLs) into a roun= > d hole (where it's otherwise not needed). I think local context IDs will m= > ake a come back once we regain our sanity. :). > > On Tuesday, July 23, 2013, Kireeti Kompella wrote: > Hi Xuxiaohu, > > Sorry for the previous empty email. > > On Jul 23, 2013, at 4:51, Xuxiaohu <[email protected]<javascript:;>> wrot= > e: > > > The reason that I started this discussion is to make sure whether the Vir= > tual Network Context Identification contained in the data packet is REALLY = > required to be globally unique in some cases. > > No. There's nothing useful that I know that one can do with global IDs in t= > he data plane that one cannot do with local IDs, and local IDs are easier t= > o allocate and manage. So, I'd be going the other way and advocate locally = > significant VNIDs for VXLAN and NVGRE, not global IDs for VPNs. (And I do) > > Kireeti > _______________________________________________ > nvo3 mailing list > [email protected]<javascript:;> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 > > --_000_BB8D8AEC7DBA1F41810DCB5D38AF56ABA3B78814C8HQ1EXCH02corp_ > Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > <html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-micr= > osoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = > xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"; xmlns=3D"http:= > //www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT= > =3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"><meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Micros= > oft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!-- > /* Font Definitions */ > @font-face > {font-family:Wingdings; > panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;} > @font-face > {font-family:Wingdings; > panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;} > @font-face > {font-family:Calibri; > panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} > @font-face > {font-family:Tahoma; > panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} > /* Style Definitions */ > p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal > {margin:0in; > margin-bottom:.0001pt; > font-size:12.0pt; > font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} > a:link, span.MsoHyperlink > {mso-style-priority:99; > color:blue; > text-decoration:underline;} > a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed > {mso-style-priority:99; > color:purple; > text-decoration:underline;} > p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate > {mso-style-priority:99; > mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char"; > margin:0in; > margin-bottom:.0001pt; > font-size:8.0pt; > font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";} > span.EmailStyle17 > {mso-style-type:personal; > font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; > color:#1F497D;} > span.BalloonTextChar > {mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char"; > mso-style-priority:99; > mso-style-link:"Balloon Text"; > font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";} > span.EmailStyle20 > {mso-style-type:personal-reply; > font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; > color:#1F497D;} > .MsoChpDefault > {mso-style-type:export-only; > font-size:10.0pt;} > @page WordSection1 > {size:8.5in 11.0in; > margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;} > div.WordSection1 > {page:WordSection1;} > --></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> > <o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" /> > </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> > <o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit"> > <o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" /> > </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vli= > nk=3Dpurple><div class=3DWordSection1><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'f= > ont-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>A central= > ized architecture for a single domain is the way things<o:p></o:p></span></= > p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri= > ","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>will be in practice (already are). One way or= > the other, non-virtualized<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span= > style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D= > '>network devices (physical switches etc) will have to fit into that<o:p></= > o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-fa= > mily:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>model.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p c= > lass=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","san= > s-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><s= > pan style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F4= > 97D'>Now we can debate the definition of a domain is </span><span style=3D'= > font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Wingdings;color:#1F497D'>J</span><span style= > =3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> It = > may<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0= > pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>be defined by the scop= > e of a centralized control plane?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal= > ><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#= > 1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'fon= > t-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Somesh<o:p>= > </o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-= > family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><d= > iv style=3D'border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.= > 0pt'><div><div style=3D'border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:= > 3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=3DMsoNormal><b><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;= > font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style=3D'font-size= > :10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> [email protected] [mailto:n= > [email protected]] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Lucy yong<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday= > , July 23, 2013 8:15 AM<br><b>To:</b> Aldrin Isaac; Kireeti Kompella<br><b>= > Cc:</b> [email protected]; L3VPN; Yakov Rekhter; [email protected]; Xuxia= > ohu; Luyuan Fang (lufang); UTTARO, JAMES<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [nvo3] The = > possibility of using global MPLS labels as VNIs ... for l3vpn<o:p></o:p></s= > pan></p></div></div><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=3DMs= > oNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";= > color:#1F497D'>For distributed based architecture, the local context ID has= > a lot of benefits. For centralized (or SDN) architecture, will the global = > context ID have advance? Another way to ask this is: is distributed a= > rchitecture better than centralized architecture for VPN or virtual network= > overlay?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-siz= > e:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p= > ></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-famil= > y:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Lucy<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class= > =3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-se= > rif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style=3D'border:none;b= > order-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'><div><div style=3D'b= > order:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p cla= > ss=3DMsoNormal><b><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","san= > s-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Taho= > ma","sans-serif"'> <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]";>nvo3-bounces@ie= > tf.org</a> [<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]";>mailto:nvo3-bounces@ie= > tf.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Aldrin Isaac<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July = > 23, 2013 8:00 AM<br><b>To:</b> Kireeti Kompella<br><b>Cc:</b> Luyuan Fang (= > lufang); L3VPN; Yakov Rekhter; <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]";>[email protected]= > rg</a>; Xuxiaohu; <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]";>thomas.morin@o= > range.com</a>; UTTARO, JAMES<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [nvo3] The possibility = > of using global MPLS labels as VNIs ... for l3vpn<o:p></o:p></span></p></di= > v></div><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal>+1.<= > o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p = > class=3DMsoNormal>Network operators lose flexibility with Global VNIDs= > . Virtual topology will be fine tuned on top of VNIDs by&nbs= > p;squeezing a square peg (ACLs) into a round hole (where it's otherwise not= > needed). I think local context IDs will make a come back once w= > e regain our sanity. :).<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=3DMso= > Normal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=3DMsoNormal>On Tuesday, July 23, = > 2013, Kireeti Kompella wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal>Hi Xuxiaoh= > u,<br><br>Sorry for the previous empty email.<br><br>On Jul 23, 2013, at 4:= > 51, Xuxiaohu <<a href=3D"javascript:;">[email protected]</a>> wrote= > :<br><br>> The reason that I started this discussion is to make sure whe= > ther the Virtual Network Context Identification contained in the data packe= > t is REALLY required to be globally unique in some cases.<br><br>No. There'= > s nothing useful that I know that one can do with global IDs in the data pl= > ane that one cannot do with local IDs, and local IDs are easier to allocate= > and manage. So, I'd be going the other way and advocate locally significan= > t VNIDs for VXLAN and NVGRE, not global IDs for VPNs. (And I do)<br><br>Kir= > eeti<br>_______________________________________________<br>nvo3 mailing lis= > t<br><a href=3D"javascript:;">[email protected]</a><br><a href=3D"https://www.i= > etf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3" target=3D"_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailm= > an/listinfo/nvo3</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></body></h= > tml>= > > --_000_BB8D8AEC7DBA1F41810DCB5D38AF56ABA3B78814C8HQ1EXCH02corp_-- >
