Sent from my iPhone
> -----Original Message----- > From: NAPIERALA, MARIA H [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 1:49 PM > To: Thomas Narten; John E Drake > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [nvo3] VRF text (take 3) in draft-narten-nvo3-overlay- > problem-statement-02.txt > > One ("organizational") comment is that since L3VPN is not only an RFC > but it has been widely deployed for 14 years, it should precede the > others mentioned in the proposed text. JD: Totally irrelevant > It seems to be mentioned as an > "afterthought".. JD: No. The section starts by describing issues with VLANs. E-VPN is then described as it does not have these issues. L3VPN is then introduced in the context of VM mobility > The L3VPN description itself is not precise and not sufficient JD: This is a helpful comment > (and needs to include a reference to draft-marques-end-system). JD: Why, other than you like the draft? > > Maria > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > > Of Thomas Narten > > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 3:57 PM > > To: John E Drake > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [nvo3] VRF text (take 3) in draft-narten-nvo3-overlay- > > problem-statement-02.txt > > > > WG: > > > > To circle back to this thread: > > > > John E Drake <[email protected]> writes: > > > > > I would be happy to help. As the text of the two paragraphs has > > > been in flux, would you please send me what you consider to be the > > > latest text? > > > > John did provide text, and it is in > > draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement-03.txt, which was posted > > last week. It says: > > > > For IP/MPLS networks, Ethernet Virtual Private Network (E-VPN) > > [I-D.ietf-l2vpn-evpn] provides an emulated Ethernet service in > which > > each tenant has its own Ethernet network over a common IP or MPLS > > infrastructure and a BGP/MPLS control plane is used to distribute > > the > > tenant MAC addresses and the MPLS labels that identify the tenants > > and tenant MAC addresses. Within the BGP/MPLS control plane a > > thirty > > two bit Ethernet Tag is used to identify the broadcast domains > > (VLANs) associated with a given L2 VLAN service instance and these > > Ethernet tags are mapped to VLAN IDs understood by the tenant at > the > > service edges. This means that the limit of 4096 VLANs is > > associated > > with an individual tenant service edge, enabling a much higher > level > > of scalability. Interconnectivity between tenants is also allowed > > in > > a controlled fashion. > > > > IP/MPLS networks also provide an IP VPN service (L3 VPN) [RFC4364] > > in > > which each tenant has its own IP network over a common IP or MPLS > > infrastructure and a BGP/MPLS control plane is used to distribute > > the > > tenant IP routes and the MPLS labels that identify the tenants and > > tenant IP routes. As with E-VPNs, interconnectivity between > tenants > > is also allowed in a controlled fashion. > > > > VM Mobility [I-D.raggarwa-data-center-mobility] introduces the > > concept of a combined L2/L3 VPN service in order to support the > > mobility of individual Virtual Machines (VMs) between Data Centers > > connected over a common IP or MPLS infrastructure. > > > > There are a number of VPN approaches that provide some if not all > of > > the desired semantics of virtual networks. A gap analysis will be > > needed to assess how well existing approaches satisfy the > > requirements. > > > > Does that text work for folk? > > > > Thomas > > > > _______________________________________________ > > nvo3 mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
