Hi Gu,  questions inline -- aldrin

On Jul 12, 2012, at 3:01 AM, Guyingjie (Yingjie) wrote:

> The MACs and VLANs fields in VDP tlv can be null if they are not necessary to 
> be transferred from End device to NVE. The VSI ID information can be used to 
> find out which VN the VM belongs to. From this point of view, I don't think 
> that we need a new protocol for L3. 
> 

Could the VSI Type ID be used to represent a generic service handle that is 
interpreted by a network manager to deliver service related configuration to 
the NVE?  How large is the VSI ID?  Seems to be only two octets from what I can 
gather -- this doesn't seem like it is large for environments where there are 
many defined network service instances/templates.

> To support VN attach/detach on L3VPN discussed in the thread, IMHO, it's easy 
> to find suitable information or easily add new to /delete unnecessary field 
> from VDP. 
> 
> But there is still something to consider while using VDP in L3VPN case, 
> because VDP is defined to be running on ECP(Edge Control Protocol), which is 
> intended to operate between two peers over an IEEE802.1LAN. ECP has a 
> designated Ether-type. ECP can be used to transmit various Upper Layer 
> protocol, e.g. VDP and PE CSP(IEEE 802.1BR), and can carry more than one TLVs 
> in one ECPDU. 
> 
> In the case, where TES and NVE are on different physical entities, and using 
> L2. NVE receives ECP, decap the VDP TLV and send to upper layer for 
> processing. A L-ACK is sent to TES(or say End Device) before next ECPDU can 
> be sent from TES. 
> 
> If in the case where TES and NVE are on different physical entities, and 
> using L3 protocol, there are two ways that we can do:
> 1) ECP is supported by router NVE, which I think is not difficult. 
> 2) another protocol is designated to carry VDP, correspondingly Hypervisor 
> must support this protocol, e.g. BGP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Best Regards
> Gu Yingjie
> 
> 
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 NAPIERALA, MARIA 
> H
> 发送时间: 2012年7月12日 乐乐1:43
> 收件人: Paul Unbehagen
> 抄送: Thomas Narten; Luyuan Fang (lufang); [email protected]
> 主题: Re: [nvo3] TES-NVE attach/detach protocol security (mobility-issues draft)
> 
> My main point was that VDP is not needed in a layer 3 solution since MACs and 
> VLANs are irrelevant to layer 3.
> Dealing with a protocol which was defined for interoperability with bridging 
> would be unnecessary complication to a layer 3 solution.
> 
> Maria
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Paul Unbehagen [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 1:18 PM
>> To: NAPIERALA, MARIA H
>> Cc: Thomas Narten; Luyuan Fang (lufang); [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [nvo3] TES-NVE attach/detach protocol security (mobility-
>> issues draft)
>> 
>> VDP isn't that complicated of a protocol.  It was designed to
>> autoconnect VMs to the proper VLAN and any tenant profile required by
>> involving communication to a management system which then configures
>> the proper tenant parameters in the ToR/EoR in a automated way.  This
>> is all transparent to the routing layer as the IP and default gateway
>> and vlan assignment take care of all that automatically.
>> 
>> I believe it's already in a few server vendors products already as I
>> saw prototypes of it a couple years ago.
>> 
>> --
>> Paul Unbehagen
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 10:20 AM, "NAPIERALA, MARIA H" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> Also VDP is between the Hypervisor and NVE. Thus, it may still be
>>>> needed, even if the service provided to the TES is L3 only.
>>> 
>>> In a layer 3 solution (whether encapsulation starts at the hypervisor
>> or on a switch outside of the hypervisor) there is no need to run a
>> complicated (IEEE) protocol such as VDP. VDP was invented to
>> interoperate a virtual server with an external layer 2 switch/bridge.
>>> A layer 3 solution can use much simpler IP-based protocol (developed
>> in IETF) such as Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP).
>>> 
>>> Maria
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nvo3 mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

Reply via email to