Hi, Linda. I think we captured the same idea in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the proposed charter. (See http://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/nvo3/charter-ietf-nvo3-01-rev-20140808.txt for reference.) Are you suggesting that we also add those ideas to the first paragraph? I think that could be a good idea, but I'd like to do it in a concise way.
If so, could you please look at the text from Don Fedyk (see https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nvo3/Z_vhgIF_rWz92VxuuZ1pMXjfaUo) and suggest how to improve it with these ideas? Thanks, -Benson On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> wrote: > Benson, > > > > I like your elaboration: a specific type of DCVPN: overlay-based with a > logically centralized control plane. > > It would be great if this explanation can be included in the Charter, > something like: > > > > “An NVO3 solution is to address a specific type of Data Center Virtual > Private Network (DCVPN) that is overlay-based with a logically centralized > control plane. The NVO3 WG will develop a set of protocols and/or protocol > extensions that address the issues > > described by draft-ietf-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement consistent with the > > approach described by draft-ietf-nvo3-framework.” > > > > Linda > > > > > > > > *From:* Benson Schliesser [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Thursday, August 14, 2014 12:57 PM > *To:* Linda Dunbar > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [nvo3] Fwd: DRAFT Charter Update for Discussion > > > > Hi, Linda. > > > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The proposed charter is so general that there is not much to pick on. Yes, > you have done a great job drafting it. > > > > I'm not sure if you're serious, or teasing me / being sarcastic, but > either way I guess it puts a smile on my face. ;) > > > > So the NVO3 is now DCVPN? Since the underlay is IP, will it become > another L3VPN? > > > > Somebody else asked me a similar question privately, so I want to make > sure it's clear... > > > > The term "NVO3" refers to a working group. The term "DCVPN" refers to the > category of solutions for providing multi-tenancy, etc in a DC environment. > There are possibly many technical approaches to designing a DCVPN. Some of > those approaches might be based on protocols like BGP, MPLS, etc, which are > developed in other WGs. As proposed in the new charter, NVO3 does not own > the scope / charter for all work on DCVPNs. Rather, the proposed NVO3 > charter is meant to narrow our focus to a specific type of DCVPN: > overlay-based with a logically centralized control plane. > > > > That being said, is that not clear from the text that we proposed? Is > there some specific way that it could be improved? > > > > Cheers, > > -Benson > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
