While I don't think we should go down the path of IP-A/IP-B
networks similar to some other DC technology, we will face the
reality of some NVE elements (hypervisor soft switches) not being
underlay IP routers.
We could either:
(A) ignore the issue and expect the network designer to solve it
using any one of the existing NIC teaming/MLAG kludges while
retaining a single encapsulation IP address per NVE;
[Linda] When NIC teaming/MLAG is used, you are assuming that the
external switch is the two NICs on the server are connected by Layer
2, is it correct? If NVE is at the NIC, how to use NIC teaming or
MLAG?
Did you actually mean NVE at the NIC, not hypervisor? Why would anyone
do that?
(B) provide support for multiple encapsulation addresses per NVE so
a multi-homed NVE could have one IP address per physical interface
and send and receive nvo3-encapsulated frames using more than one
address.
[Linda] Then the remote NVE will have two possible (IP) addresses to
send data back. Who is responsible for balancing the inbound
traffic?
Remote NVE, who else?
Ivan
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
