Hi Lucy,

On Sep 17, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Lucy yong <[email protected]> wrote:

> Read this draft.
> 
> RFC5512 applies a case where two BGP speakers are in a BGP free core. Using 
> encapsulation tunnel between two speakers enables one speaker to send a 
> packet to another speaker as the next-hop.
> 
> Using this approach in nvo3 may rise a high scalability concern because any 
> pair of NVEs in an NVO will need to maintain a state for the tunnel 
> encapsulation.  

They would have to in any case.  The tunnel encap is a couple of bits; the 
"tenant id" is also needed.

> If some NVEs support VXLAN and some support NVGRE, to build mcast tree for 
> BUM, it has to build two distinct sub-trees for each, which is more complex.
> 
>   "This memo specifies that an egress PE must use the sender MAC 
>   address to determine whether to send a received Broadcast or 
>   Multicast packet to a given Ethernet Segment.  I.e., if the sender 
>   MAC address is associated with a given Ethernet Segment, the egress
>   PE must not send the packet to that Ethernet Segment."
> 
> Does it mean using BGP to exchange NVE MAC address that belong to an Ethernet 
> segment first? How does this impact other evpn features?

Yes to the first question; not at all (imo) to the second.

> This needs to be cooked more.

I think it's pretty well cooked, although I must confess a predilection for 
sushi.  In effect, these very capable authors saved me the trouble of writing 
pretty much the same draft :-)

The only thing I would change is the draft name: I prefer 
"…-nvo3-l2-in-l3-control-plane".  Oh, and add a code point for STT :-)

Kireeti

> Cheers,
> Lucy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
> Aldrin Isaac
> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 2:18 PM
> To: Stiliadis, Dimitrios (Dimitri)
> Cc: Thomas Nadeau; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [nvo3] draft-drake-nvo3-evpn-control-plane
> 
> I'm not sure that the dust has fully settled on the matter.
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-marques-l3vpn-end-system-07 suggests
> the use of XMPP.  The question is whether there is any sound technical
> reason (versus preferences) why leveraging BGP is problematic.  I
> personally haven't heard a convincing argument.
> 
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Stiliadis, Dimitrios (Dimitri)
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> May be I missing something here .. but does this suggest running BGP-EVPN
>> on the NVE
>> that is located in the hypervisor?
>> 
>> Dimitri
>> 
>> On 9/17/12 8:55 AM, "Thomas Nadeau" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>>      A number of us just published this draft and wanted to bring it to the
>>> NVO3 WG's attention.  We will be presenting/discussing this draft at the
>>> interim meeting this week as well, but please discuss here on the list as
>>> well.
>>> 
>>>      Thanks,
>>> 
>>>      Tom, John, et al
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A new version of I-D, draft-drake-nvo3-evpn-control-plane-00.txt
>>> has been successfully submitted by Thomas D. Nadeau and posted to the
>>> IETF repository.
>>> 
>>> Filename:       draft-drake-nvo3-evpn-control-plane
>>> Revision:       00
>>> Title:          A Control Plane for Network Virtualized Overlays
>>> Creation date:  2012-09-16
>>> WG ID:          Individual Submission
>>> Number of pages: 12
>>> URL:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-drake-nvo3-evpn-control-plane-00
>>> .txt
>>> Status:
>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-drake-nvo3-evpn-control-plane
>>> Htmlized:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-drake-nvo3-evpn-control-plane-00
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Abstract:
>>>      The purpose of this document is to describe how Ethernet Virtual
>>>      Private Network (E-VPN) can be used as the control plane for
>>>      Network Virtual Overlays.  Currently this protocol is defined to
>>>      act as the control plane for Virtual Extensible Local Area
>>>      Network (VXLAN), Network Virtualization using Generic Routing
>>>      Encapsulation (NVGRE), MPLS or VLANs while maintaining their
>>>      existing data plane encapsulations. The intent is that this
>>>      protocol will be capable of extensions in the future to handle
>>>      additinal data plane encapsulations and functions as needed.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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

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

Reply via email to