True. I would be a NIC for an untagged interface, and a NIC+VLAN sub interface for a tagged VLAN. - Larry
From: Anoop Ghanwani <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Friday, April 19, 2013 4:22 PM To: Thomas Narten <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Pat Thaler <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Qin Wu <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [nvo3] vNICs and pNics in draft-wu-nvo3-nve2nve-04.txt On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Thomas Narten <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Another way of looking at it is that the TSI is an attachement point/interface to the TS. The point where the TSI attaches to the TS has two sides. On the tenant facing side, it appears to be a NIC. It looks like a NIC, behaves like a NIC, etc. On the side facing away from the tenant (e.g., the hypervisor in the case of a virtualized system) we call it a TSI. The TSI side will have attributes that are specific to NVO3. Does that make sense? I don't agree that it always appears as a NIC. It appears as some sort of protocol interface, but that is not necessarily a NIC to the tenant system. For example, in the physical world, a VLAN doesn't look like a NIC to the host OS. Anoop
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
