Hi Linda, See my responses inline below.
- Larry From: Linda Dunbar <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Thursday, October 24, 2013 11:19 AM To: Larry Kreeger <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Linda Dunbar <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Thomas Narten <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, David Black <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: RE: Suggested additional requirement to be added to "draft-ietf-nvo3-nve-nva-cp-req-00" Larry, Could you please explain the following question? LK> I don't agree that the NVA should be connected to an NVE. I see no benefit to this. The NVA should connect directly to the underlay, just as the NVEs do. [Linda] NVA has to be placed somewhere in a data center. LK> I agree. Say a NVA is placed on a server rack. Most server racks are pre-wired with each slot to the ToR switch. LK> Sounds reasonable. In an environment where the ToR is the NVE, then the NVA is attached to the NVE. How would you call this attachment? LK> I would expect anyone designing a ToR to make it capable of providing edge ports that are capable of being connected to either an overlay VN, or the the underlay. For example, if the ToR is a pure L2 device, I would expect some edge ports to be configurable to connect to a VN, and other port to connect to a VLAN which is connected to the underlay network. I would connect the NVA to the latter port. Linda
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
