Hi Lucy, I'm confused with "in this case, WAN PE is aware of VxLAN, i.e. VxLAN ID will be used between DCGW and WAN PE to identify tenant virtual network. "
Will VxLAN ID still exist outside of DC Virtual Network? Thank you! Regards, Yuxia [email protected] 写于 2012-11-30 01:49:04: > Hi Bhargav, > > Thank you for the support and feedback. > > Since this is the use case draft, it just focuses on the general use > cases, not particular solution. There may be multiple solutions to > apply one use case and we do not intend to suggestion any solution > for a use case. In the case we need to give an example to explain > the use case, we should state out clearly that it is just an example. > > Section 4.2 intends to describe the use case for a DC virtual > network and an external user network are connected via a WAN VPN. It > gives one example how to make DC virtual network and WAN VPN > interworking via a local LAN, which is like rfc4364 option A. > Therefore, in this example, PE is not aware of VxLAN ID, DC GW will > map VxLAN ID to a local VLAN (ID). Since the VLAN ID is just local > between PE and CE, it should not be an issue of 12bits. However, you > can also use rfc4364 option B to implement this use case, where DCGW > and WAN PE acts as an ASBR in two ASes, in this case, WAN PE is > aware of VxLAN, i.e. VxLAN ID will be used between DCGW and WAN PE > to identify tenant virtual network. Other solutions can be implemented too. > > We will fix the text in next version to make clear between a use > case and an example to describe the case. > > Regards, > Lucy > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 8:54 AM > > To: Lucy yong; [email protected]; [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > > Subject: RE: the request to adopt draft-mity-nvo3-use-case-04 as nvo3 > > WG document > > > > Hi Lucy, > > > > > > > > Support this draft and have a comment WRT section 4.2 *DC virtual > > network and WAN VPN Interconnection* > > > > > > > > The draft suggests to use VRF-LITE mechanism between PE2 and NVE2, > > where VLAN is used to identfiy a customer/tenant. VxLAN is used in DC > > networks to identify a tenant which is 24 bit where as VLAN is 12 bit. > > Does the draft suggest to use VLAN or VxLAN between PE-CE?. If it were > > VxLAN, should not PE be VxLAN aware ? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > Bhargav > > > > ________________________________ > > From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lucy > > yong [[email protected]] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 11:41 AM > > To: Matthew Bocci; Benson Schliesser > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > > Subject: [nvo3] the request to adopt draft-mity-nvo3-use-case-04 as > > nvo3 WG document > > > > Hi Matthew and Benson, > > > > In IETF 85 meeting, there is a good consent in keeping this draft as > > individual WG document and move it along with the > > problem/framework/requirement drafts. We, co-authors, would like see it > > being adopted as WG doc. now. > > > > Regards, > > Lucy > > > > _______________________________________________ > nvo3 mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
