Hi Xiaohu,

On 12 Feb 2014, at 01:45, Xuxiaohu <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> 
>> -----邮件原件-----
>> 发件人: Giles Heron [mailto:[email protected]]
>> 发送时间: 2014年2月11日 19:32
>> 收件人: Thomas Morin
>> 抄送: [email protected]; [email protected]
>> 主题: Re: Poll for adoption: draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet
>> 
>> Hi Thomas
>> 
>> I guess the way I see it is that this is such a big limitation that I find 
>> it hard to
>> imagine anyone deploying this solution.
> 
> Hi Giles,
> 
> I suggest you google with the following keywords "Dynamic Fabric Automation 
> (DFA) host route" and have a look at how host routes are used in the DFA, and 
> then come back to confirm the above assertion. If you couldn't find it, feel 
> free to tell me and I will provide you a link.

I'll leave it to those who know more about how DFA works than I do to comment.

>> is there any way we could get feedback from some data center operators?
>> Perhaps we should ask NVO3 for comments?
> 
> I think the most efficient and simple way is to ask some feedback from your 
> colleagues who knows about DFA.

sure.  hopefully some of them read this list.

Giles

> Best regards,
> Xiaohu
> 
>> Giles
>> 
>> On 11 Feb 2014, at 10:06, Thomas Morin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Giles,
>>> 
>>> 2014-02-10, Giles Heron:
>>>> The draft has a major limitation (no support for interconnecting
>>>> routers, but only for interconnecting hosts) [...]
>>> 
>>> That would indeed be an issue if the document was aiming standard track to
>> address a specific use case including router interconnections, or if the 
>> limitation
>> was not documented.  But, the document is not aiming standard track, and has
>> a section to document limitations to which the working group may contribute
>> text for this particular limitation.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> sorry - just spotted the poll has already closed.
>>> 
>>> The date had been mistakenly set 10 days too early.
>>> The poll is not closed yet.
>>> 
>>> -Thomas
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 4 Feb 2014, at 13:35, Thomas Morin <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hello working group,
>>>>> 
>>>>> This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
>>>>> draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet [1] as a working group item.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption
>>>>> or not (in the later case, please also state the reasons).
>>>>> 
>>>>> This poll runs until February 9th.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> *Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that
>>>>> applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in
>>>>> compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and
>>>>> 5378 for more details).
>>>>> 
>>>>> ==> *If you are listed as a document author or contributor* please
>>>>> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of
>>>>> any relevant IPR.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received
>>>>> from each author and contributor.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you are on the L3VPN WG mailing list but are not listed as an
>>>>> author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you
>>>>> are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance
>>>>> with IETF rules.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Martin & Thomas l3vpn chairs
>>>>> 
>>>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet
>>>> 
>>> 
> 

Reply via email to