I agree with Larry. Besides, I am also questioning the following statement in the same paragraph, "the inner TTL field MUST be decremented by 1". I think a more precise description is that "the inner TTL field MUST be decremented by <at least> 1". Decrementing by more than 1 should be allowed.
And is there any reason why the overlay network should look like one hop to the sending NVE? -- Yiqun From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Larry Kreeger (kreeger) Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 2:26 PM To: LASSERRE, MARC (MARC); [email protected] Subject: [nvo3] nvo3 DP Reqs: integrated bridging and routing Hi Marc and Nabil, In section 3.2.2, I was not sure what the following statement meant: "In addition, integrated routing and bridging per tenant must be supported on an NVE." One could interpret this to mean that NVEs must support both L2 and L3 mode...but then two sentences previous to that it stated "L2 and L3 VNIs can be deployed in isolation or in combination to optimize traffic flows per tenant across the overlay network." Can you clarify the meaning for the first quoted sentence? If it means that NVEs must provide both L2 and L3 VNI services, then I don't see why that should be so. The NVEs may well provide only L2 services and have end systems connected to them provide the L3 services to interconnect the L2 VNIs. Thanks, Larry From: <LASSERRE>, "MARC (MARC)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Thursday, May 17, 2012 1:31 AM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [nvo3] New dataplane requirements draft We have just posted a new draft on nvo3 data plane requirements: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-bitar-lasserre-nvo3-dp-reqs-00.txt We welcome your feedback. Our intent is to submit a revised version by Vancouver addressing your comments and/or suggestions. Thanks, Marc
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
