It's a worthwhile point. While I think it's always better to design for "N" and 
not "2" I don't think I have ever seen more that two vNICs on a VM. For the 
primary reason that it's usually 1:1 app to VM (if you can run multiple apps in 
the OS, then just keep running Linux, move on and forge this whole 
virtualization fad)

The only argument I can think of for running more than 2 is bandwidth, but 
vNICs are not NICs and can be bound to any speed interface the hypervisor is 
willing to support. So bandwidth is not a reason to bond 7 vNICs to a VM.

So while designing for N is logical, worrying too much about more than 2 vNICs 
per VM isn't terrible realistic.

And as you said many many customers just run one vNIC per VM.

J

On Apr 17, 2013, at 4:15 PM, Truman Boyes <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hilarious. 
> 
> Btw, is this multiple vNIC scenario based on real world experience? I am 
> scared of more than 1 vNIC in a large scale deployment due to complexities in 
> routing at the host level and further upstream. 
> 
> There may be corner cases the require a different set of reachable vectors 
> for a vm but there are many ways to provide that without more vNICs. Not 
> completely opposed to the idea, but when I see scenarios discussing VMs with 
> 5 vNICs I think the IETF may be off course here.
> 
> There is a lot of rope, it's our choice to make a raft or a noose.
> 
> 
> Truman
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, April 17, 2013, John E Drake wrote:
>> This thread reminds me of the lyrics to a Nicki Minaj song.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Irrespectively Yours,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> John
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Qin 
>> Wu
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 7:15 PM
>> To: Larry Kreeger (kreeger); Anoop Ghanwani; Black, David
>> Cc: [email protected]; Reith, Lothar
>> Subject: [nvo3] 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: NVO3 Terminology changes
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Hi, Larry:
>> 
>> Is relation between vNIC and TSI one to one or one to more?
>> 
>> Let me interpret what you said below,
>> 
>> (a)If a VM has only one vNIC, then vNIC that belongs to the VM will be dealt 
>> with as one tenant system. Each vNIC corresponds to one TSI.
>> 
>> (b) If a VM has 5 vNICs and each vNIC is assigned with only one IP address, 
>> each vNIC that belongs to the same VM will be treated as one Tenant System. 
>> Each vNIC corresponds to one TSI. Then one VM have 5 Tenant system. Each 
>> Tenant System has one TSI.
>> 
>> (c) If a VM has 5 vNICs and each vNIC is assigned with 2 IP addresses, each 
>> vNIC that belongs to the same VM will be treated as one Tenant system, each 
>> vNIC with each IP address corresponds to one TSI. Then one VM has 5 tenant 
>> system. Each Tenant system has 2 TSIs.
>> 
>> That is to say if the relation between vNIC and TSi is one to more, then we 
>> can easy to guarantee that each TSI is associated with only one NVE.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> However if one VM is simply regarded as one tenant system and each vNIC with 
>> multiple IP addresses belonging to one VM is treated as only one TSI in 
>> (b)(c), take (c) as an example. when one vNIC is assigned with multiple IP 
>> addresses and connect to multiple VNs through multiple NVE, then one TSI has 
>> multiple IP addresses and will be associated with multiple NVEs.
>> 
>> Here is two figure2, figure 1 shows one to one relation between vNIC and 
>> TSI, figure 2 shows one to more relation between vNIC and TSI.
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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