On 2012-07-06 8:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Luyuan,
- "virtual routers" <> multiple VRFs on a router ... Could you
help us with the IETF reference if you think your "virtual router"
definition is correct?
Sure, "virtual router" is the correct term, a "virtual router" is definitely
not a VRF for a BGP/MPLS VPN and the term "virtual router" has been in use in
the IETF for well over a decade.
The two paragraphs in question were always intended to refer to the concept
of a "virtual router" as that term is used with VRRP, see RFC 5798, and the
use of "virtual router" dates back to at least the first version of VRRP,
RFC 2338 (1998). In 20/20 hindsight, the use of the VRF acronym in those
two paragraphs was a mistake that we are now correcting - that mistake is
at the root of this confusion (mea culpa, as I'm a co-author of that original
text). Do we need to cite RFC 5798 to make this clearer?
FYI, per http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4110#section-1.5 a Virtual Router
is defined as:
Virtual Router (VR): An instance of one of a number of logical
routers located within a single physical router. Each logical router
emulates a physical router using existing mechanisms and tools for
configuration, operation, accounting, and maintenance.
For more context, one might also wish to read
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l3vpn-as-vr-02 and some of its
references.
Cheers,
-Benson
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
