On Sep 18, 2012:6:26 PM, at 6:26 PM, Kireeti Kompella <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Lucy, > > Sent from my iPad > > On Sep 18, 2012, at 13:18, Lucy yong <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Kreeti, >> >> Regarding interworking capability, Is "a given EVI can support multiple data >> plane encapsulation" equivalent to say "individual NVEs need to support >> multiple encapsulation schemas"? > > Not "need", but "nice to have", esp. from an interworking pov. > >> If one NVE only supports VXLAN and another NVE only supports MPLS-in-GRE, >> two will not able to work in a same EVI, is that right? > > Clearly so. > >> Will this give more benefit than having one encapsulation in an EVI or make >> more complex? > > I would guess that most DCs will use only one encap. However, if more than > one encap was used, and enough devices did multiple encaps, this might still > work. > > Stepping back, though, this is not really about interworking, but rather, > leveraging a single control across many encaps. This is especially > interesting as many encaps still don't have a signaling plane. TOM: Precisely. > A side benefit, yet to be explored and exploited, is making the VNID locally > significant. This is a huge step, IMO, as this offloads the intelligence of > assigning and managing VNIDs from a central entity to the nve. TOM: Yes. --Tom > > Kireeti > >> Regards, >> Lucy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 8:18 PM >> To: Lucy yong >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [nvo3] draft-drake-nvo3-evpn-control-plane >> >> 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 > _______________________________________________ > nvo3 mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 > _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
