On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Lizhong Jin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Larry, > I wonder if point C or D is feasible in implementation. In my > understanding, the TSI must be a virtual port which could be associated > with the special VN, and transmit/receive packets from tenant system (the > virtual port terminology is used in many switch chip). If we use one IP > address, we could not treat it as a virtual port. One simple example, if > packet with broadcast IP address received, will this packet be send to IP_a > and IP_b on the same vNIC? > > We have those same issues with MAC address-based VLANs, and with multinetted interfaces, but that doesn't stop people from using both of those features. Now whether or not we want to pursue these as a working group is a different matter, but it's worthwhile to at least be aware of what's in and what's not and to clearly document these somewhere. Anoop
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
