Jeff,

I agree that supporting LAG/ECMP at the NIC->host interface is the issue for 
both VXLAN/NVGRE. However if NVGRE uses gre-in-udp, it will make future NIC 
enhancement for this capability much simpler since both encapsulations use udp 
src port for the flow entropy that is used by LB.  Why do you think that inner 
payload inspection is necessary for ECMP LB?

Thank,
Lucy



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeff 
Wheeler
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 1:13 PM
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [nvo3] LAG/ECMP load-balancing problems facing overlay networks

On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Lucy yong <[email protected]> wrote:
> *         Requirement: For performance reasons, multipath over LAG and ECMP
> paths SHOULD be supported.
>
> VXLAN supports common five tuple based LB. NVGRE requests LB to use 
> GRE header, which is not commonly supported by underlying IP network.

I'd like to note that it is becoming increasingly common for the underlying L3 
or L2 network to support load-balancing based on GRE inner-header fields.  In 
fact, this can be largely relied on for high-bandwidth GRE tunnels over the 
public Internet (!) today, and within many datacenter networks.

Where this is not so reliable is in the NIC->Host interface.  This is an issue 
facing NVGRE, and in some circumstance, VXLAN also.

For example, the most popular 10GE server NIC chipsets will deliver all NVGRE 
packets to a host DMA ring buffer based on the GRE outer-header only.  One 
example is the Intel 82599, which everyone must be familiar with to have an 
informed opinion on vRouter-related topics.  Even if the NIC is configured with 
several DMA rings, and the vRouter is able to use different CPU cores to 
service those rings for distribution of the work, all NVGRE traffic (having 
same outer-header) will arrive at only one DMA ring, and other CPU cores may 
not be utilized.

If vRouters are used to support network-heavy applications, NIC vendors must be 
encouraged to support additional header inspection which may then be used for 
load-balancing across host DMA rings.  One would hope same vendors will 
eventually implement hardware offload of VXLAN/NVGRE entirely, and these two 
requirements share a common underlying need for the NIC to understand the 
VXLAN/NVGRE encapsulation.  In other words, if a NIC vendor plans to support 
deeper header inspection for load-balancing, they have already done some of the 
work needed to support hardware offload.

This list is very focused on procedural items and support in the networks; but 
nearly zero attention is paid to NIC->Host interface issues.  For overlay 
technologies to deliver acceptable performance for network-heavy workloads, 
NIC->Host interface must be more intelligent than it is today.  Next-generation 
NICs must implement new capabilities.  It is therefore useful to consider NICs 
in any discussion of load-balancing across the datacenter network, if for no 
other reason than to foster greater understanding of this challenge.
--
Jeff S Wheeler <[email protected]>
Sr Network Operator  /  Innovative Network Concepts 
_______________________________________________
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