OK, I'll bite. :) "Larry Kreeger (kreeger)" <[email protected]> writes:
> 1) A name for the service (lets's pick one, is it hybrid, combined > or unified?) We do a need a name. "combined L2/L3" service seems about right to me. > 2) To address it from a solution point of view (e.g. are packets > forwarded based on MAC or based on IP when source and dest are in > the same subnet?). Right. We need a clear definition of what this means as a service (i.e., facing the Tenant). How one implements it is a secondary discussion. Is it enough to say something like: If the packet is IP, it's treated as an L3 packet requiring L3 service. If it's a non-IP packet (except for things like ARP), it gets treated as an L2 packet to be processed using L2 service semantics. Can it be that simple? Thomas _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
