Hi Tom.

> Migration may be a better term than mobility, but the other part of
> the phrasing, "node", was to encompass non-VM uses cases of network
> virtualization migration in DC-- like job migration, container
> migration. Is nvo3 explicitly about "VM" migration so that these
> other cases are out of scope?

Other cases have always been in scope (e.g., Linux containers, AIX
LPARs, Solaris Zones, etc.). We just use the terms VMs and hypervisors
all the time because that is the common case, at least at the
moment. Looking at the framework and problem statement docs, this
isn't called out as clearly as it should be.

The next version of the architecture document will make this
clearer. I.e., we had  a discussion a while back on the list related
to Linux containers.

Thomas

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

Reply via email to