Thomas, et al,

This draft has done a very good job in describing the motivation for overlay 
and its potential control/data plane.

However, the draft hasn't described the issues introduced by overlay and large 
DC issues not solved by overlay. For example:


-        Multicast issues introduced by overlay:

o   IP Encapsulation by NVE (or virtual switches on server)  means that any 
layer 2 multicast  from or to VMs requires Layer 3 Multicast/broadcast support 
in the core.

o   Majority of  virtual switches  in server won't have attached VMs 
participating in any Multicast groups. Therefore, it may not be cost effective 
for them to support Layer 3 multicast protocol, e.g. PIM, etc.

o   For virtual switches that do have attached VMs participating in multicast, 
there are much more dynamic states due to VM moves.

o   The head end replication will require hypervisor virtual switches to keep 
up multicast member states,  which  can change frequently. Therefore, those 
NVEs, if required to support multicast,  have to do more than MPLS (MVPN) 
multicast supported by PE routers.

o

-        Bottleneck at gateway nodes:

o   The draft has emphasized greatly on the importance of tenant separation. 
That means two VMs under the same NVE, if they belong to two different virtual 
network instances, the communication between them have to go all the way to 
their default gateway.

o   Some end stations even have specific default gateway configured. That 
require all the inter VNI communication to go through their designated gateway 
nodes.

o   Many data centers have their FW/LB co- located with GW nodes. That means 
all the inter VNI communications have to hairpined to those GW nodes.


-        issues that are not solved by overlay:

o   The draft is for environment where VMs can move anywhere, which require the 
Gateway nodes to be aware of individual VM addresses and their corresponding 
egress NVEs.

o   Many large Data Centers have small number of gateway nodes interfacing with 
external network, e.g. 2/4/8/more. Very often, those external facing gateway 
nodes are the entrance and exit points for all virtual network instances.

o   Very often each of them can receive traffic for all virtual network 
instances hosted in the data center.

o   That means they all need to be aware of individual VMs and their 
corresponding egress NVEs in the data center. i.e. they may all need host 
routing. It is true that many routers can handle millions of routes, but the 
question is if it is necessary for data center gateway nodes to be those high 
capacity routers.

-
Therefore, I think that the NV03 problem statement draft should add a new 
section to describes issues introduced by overlay and issues not solved by 
overlay.

Linda Dunbar

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

Reply via email to