What about the following naming proposal:
- Virtual Network Endpoint Reachability Information Distribution Authority (VNERIDA) It is a functional description - as least AFAIK. It leaves it open if the information distribution model is push or pull or mixed push&pull, uses BGP or DNS or LISP or you name it. The pronounciation of the acronym is internationally fairly unambiguous, and it can be fairly easily pronounced. It does not use the term “network virtualization mapping” which is IMHO too vague, as neither networks nor virtualizations get mapped, rather the overlay address of a network endpoint in a virtual network gets mapped to a network endpoint identity belonging to a network endpoint in an underlay network. Please note that there may be a requirement for a second mapping if said underlay network endpoint identity is not a locator type routable address. In this case, this unterlay network endpoint identity must be mapped to a routable underlay network endpoint identity – presumably an IP address. It emphasizes that this is all about network endpoints which are vertices in a network according to mathematical graph theory. Most other names proposed so far have been given the – mathematically speaking – wrong impression, that this “so far nameless concept” may have anything to do with the arcs in a graph theory network. But maybe I am wrong. May I ask that those please speak up who believe that there is indeed a requirement that this “so far nameless concept” should indeed also be responsible for the distribution of information on arcs, i.e. on underlay network topology changes which do not affect the location of an overlay network endpoint. And while I am at it please note my opinion on the proposal to rename the term “VNIC” This is a No-Go. I would strongly recommend to leave the term VNIC as is. The compute centric colleagues from “the other side” of virtualization have defined it to be able to abstract it as the virtual equivalent of a physical NIC in a virtual mashine, allowing all things possible with physical NICs in a server (including NIC-Bonding = LAG) to be done with virtual NICs of a VM. We simply do not have the authority to change the meaning of that, because it may break virtualization concepts in the datacenter. But we should define the tem VNIC from the network centric side. My proposal: A VNIC is a virtual network endpoint. One physical NIC may have multiple VNICs associated to it, each with its own MAC-Layer. This definition also closes the loop to the network endpoint centric terminology proposal I made in the first part of this mail. Lothar Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Jon Hudson Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. April 2013 10:10 An: Sharon; [email protected] Cc: Truman Boyes; Lou Berger; Larry Kreeger (kreeger) Betreff: Re: [nvo3] NVO3 Terminology changes My opinion: Either the words the acronym is representing need to be descriptive & clear. Which I think this one does well. NVMA - Network Virtualization Mapping Authority Or it needs to be a nice acronym that rolls easily of the tongue and so will be freely accepted into techlish. I think this one could fill that nicely. NVO - Network Virtualization Orchestrator/Oracle For a combination of both goals maybe something like this OMA - Overlay Mapping Authority Or keep it simple with a beloved tech culture reference ;-) MCP - Mapping Control Program End of line. On Apr 9, 2013, at 9:59 PM, Sharon <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: NVMA +1 Sent from my iPhone 650 492 0794 On Apr 9, 2013, at 9:47 PM, Truman Boyes <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi, I think the below two suggestions provide the clearest terminology and description for the function: NVA - Network Virtualization Authority (may be vague) NVMA - Network Virtualization Mapping Authority (less vague) BGP might not be a mapping service; but with a stretch of the imagination the mapping of NLRI to prefix/communities/etc could fulfil the litmus test. The below words of 'server', 'controller', and 'orchestrator' carry a lot of baggage/meaning at the moment and might convey other meanings. I like the NVMA as a functional element. NVMA +1 Truman On 9 Apr, 2013, at 9:04 PM, Lou Berger <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Also... NVS - Network Virtualization Server NVC - Network Virtualization Controller NVO - Network Virtualization Orchestrator On 4/9/2013 8:27 PM, Larry Kreeger (kreeger) wrote: Lou, Given your criteria for starting with NV, we could potentially have one of the following: NVS - Network Virtualization Service (service seems vague and perhaps an overloaded term) NVA - Network Virtualization Authority (may be vague) NVMA - Network Virtualization Mapping Authority (less vague) NVO - Network Virtualization Oracle (assuming oracle is OK when it has the NV prefix) - Larry On 4/9/13 4:51 PM, "Lou Berger" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Larry, I think the NVC and NVO terms are fairly solution neutral, i.e., I don't see why not. I guess your question does lead to yet another option NVS: Network Virtualization Service I personally like NVC, but given that we have NVEs, I'd be happy with anything of the form "Network Virtualization <foo>" as long as <foo> doesn't start with an "E". Lou On 4/9/2013 7:25 PM, Larry Kreeger (kreeger) wrote: Lou, Do you see the terms "Controller" or "Orchestrator" standing up to David Black's "BGP" litmus test? - Larry On 4/9/13 3:18 PM, "Lou Berger" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On 4/8/2013 9:12 PM, Larry Kreeger (kreeger) wrote: At the NVO3 WG meeting in Orlando, I brought up some suggestions for terminology changes/additions and had an AI to bring this to the listŠso here goes. I would prefer to see constructive suggestions in responses. In other words, please suggest something better if you object to these. 1) Oracle -> Information Mapping Authority Stewart mentioned that he has copyright concerns with using the term "oracle", and others have expressed distaste as well. In draft-kreeger-nvo3-hypervisor-nve-cp-01 we replaced the term with "Information Mapping Authority" (IMA). We would like to get consensus on using this new term in all WG documents going forward. In the meeting Linda expressed a concern that IMA might get confused with IMA being confused with the acronym for Inverse Multiplexing for ATM, and suggested something like "Directory Service" to which David Black replied that she might have trouble convincing people that BGP can be categorized as a "Directory Service". Perhaps we're over thinking this one. We have NVE, so why not NV Controller (NVC) or NV Orchestrator (NVO)? Lou ... _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
