> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表
> Somesh Gupta
> 发送时间: 2012年9月5日 1:51
> 收件人: Ivan Pepelnjak; Balus, Florin Stelian (Florin)
> 抄送: [email protected]
> 主题: Re: [nvo3] Support for multi-homed NVEs
> 
> Florin,
> 
> Regarding the multi-homing, my assumption is that the
> NVE in the hypervisor would not (want to) run a routing
> protocol. So as Ivan points out, the standard would
> need to accommodate multiple IP addresses per NVE.

If a given multi-homed NVE/PE (e.g., a physical server) doesn't run a routing 
protocol with the P routers, it seems that different NICs could act as 
different virtual NVEs/PEs and VMs of a given VPN instance are therefore 
multi-homed to these virtual NVEs/PEs in either active-standby mode or in 
active-active mode. 

Xiaohu

> Somesh
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ivan Pepelnjak [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 9:58 AM
> > To: Balus, Florin Stelian (Florin)
> > Cc: Somesh Gupta; [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [nvo3] Support for multi-homed NVEs
> >
> > Ah, that other can of worms ;) Mine was simpler.
> >
> > On the underlay side, we might decide that NVEs have a single IP
> > address
> > or multiple IP addresses (like some NVGRE load balancing proposals). If
> > we decide NVEs have a single IP address (potential per virtual network
> > segment), then the rest is implementation details (and we're back to
> > MLAG/SMLT land for true redundancy). Alternatively we might implement
> > the option of having multiple IP addresses per NVE, and the NVEs might
> > use the IP-address-per-link option (thus no need for L2 or MLAG at
> > all).
> >
> > On the overlay side, the real problem (as you stated) is the
> > multi-homing of NVO3-to-legacy gateways. I don't see any other need for
> > overlay NVE multihoming.
> >
> > BTW, Nicira has nicely solved the NVO3 gateway multihoming - the whole
> > NVO3 network works exactly like VMware's vSwitch: split horizon
> > bridging
> > (thus no forwarding loops through NVO3), with every VM MAC address
> > being
> > dynamically assigned to one of the gateways, which also solves the
> > return path issues (dynamic MAC learning in legacy network takes care
> > of
> > that). Maybe we should just use the wheel that has already been
> > invented?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Ivan
> >
> > On 9/4/12 6:45 PM, Balus, Florin Stelian (Florin) wrote:
> > > I understand the discussion below is about the NVE multi-homing
> > towards the IP core, on the tunnel side.
> > >
> > > We did not focus in the framework draft on the core redundancy as in
> > our opinion there was no need to standardize anything here. There are
> > no differences from what is available today in regular IP networks: if
> > NVEs are multi-homed directly to the next IP router, regular routing
> > will take care of it. If there is Ethernet switching in between NVE and
> > the next IP hop, L2 resiliency mechanisms need to be employed. From
> > what I read below it looks more of an implementation discussion than a
> > standardization requirement. Am I right?
> > >
> > > By Multi-homed NVEs one can also understand a set of NVEs multi-homed
> > on the access side to other devices. That is a discussion we need to
> > have in my opinion. An use case example: NVO3 network - NVE GWs multi-
> > homed to external non-NVO3 networks. Handoff can be VLANs, VPLS PWs, or
> > BGP EVPN labels...
> > >
> > > I think the latter is worth discussing although there are some
> > mechanisms and some standardization initiatives in place already.
> > >
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> > Of
> > >> Ivan Pepelnjak
> > >> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 12:23 AM
> > >> To: 'Somesh Gupta'; [email protected]
> > >> Subject: Re: [nvo3] Support for multi-homed NVEs
> > >>
> > >> This is definitely an interesting can of worms ;)
> > >>
> > >> 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;
> > >>
> > >> (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.
> > >>
> > >> Option (A) is the easy way out similar to existing MPLS/VPN behavior
> > >> and would fit well with existing DC deployments. It would also
> > retain
> > >> all the server-to-ToR multihoming complexity.
> > >>
> > >> Option (B) would reduce the complexity of the underlay DC network
> > >> (which would become a simple L3 network with single-homed IP
> > >> addresses), but we'd have to deal with a bunch of additional
> > problems
> > >> (peer IP address liveliness check).
> > >>
> > >> Just speculating ...
> > >> Ivan
> > >>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> > Behalf
> > >>> Of Somesh Gupta
> > >>> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 6:58 AM
> > >>> To: [email protected]
> > >>> Subject: [nvo3] Support for multi-homed NVEs
> > >>>
> > >>> I did not see any mention of multi-homed NVEs in draft-lasserre-
> > nvo3-
> > >>> framework-03.txt. NVEs are connected together by an L3 network -
> > does
> > >>> that mean only one?
> > >>> Can it be multi-homes to two L3 networks?
> > >>>
> > >>> Somesh
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> 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