Apologies for the delay in the answer.
[snip]

> Pleas suggest specific text changes.  The framework draft already says:
1. Probably a good place will be the end of Section 4, clarification note :

 From NVO3 architecture perspective, for container based lightweight 
virtualization systems (LXC, Solaris Containers, BSD Jail, etc) the Host 
OS is considered to be the hypervisor.

Anywhere else before that is also fine. If this is in section 5 by that 
time it is too late as it has missed 4.1 and 4.2.

2. Remove all "raw" ethernet language from 4.2 and make it more generic. 
You can do the same for LXC (as is), KVM (with our patchsets already in 
the public domain) and UML (with patchsets to go into public domain) 
using hypervisor originated tunnels. This makes a tunnel terminated on a 
kvm or UML vNIC a subcase of 4.2. A host tunnel which has been 
namespaced into a container to look like an Ethernet interface (f.e host 
gre0 described in LXC config as "type phys" and "eth0") falls into the 
same category. This can be considered a split NVE (if the too specific 
language is removed from 4.2).

This is the minimum set of changes which will cover both cases.

A.

>
>         Note that some NVE functions (e.g., data plane and control plane
>         functions) may reside in one device or may be implemented separately
>         in different devices. For example, the NVE functionality could
>         reside solely on the End Devices, or be distributed between the End
>         Devices and the ToRs.
>

[snip]
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

Reply via email to