Hi Linda, > -----Original Message----- > From: Linda Dunbar > Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 6:53 AM > To: Xuxiaohu; Tom Herbert > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [nvo3] is it resonsable that > draft-dunbar-nvo3-nva-mapping-distribution-01 suggests NVE using bit-map to > represent its supported VNs? > > Xiao Hu, > > Do you mean this TLV in your draft?
Yes. > > 0 1 2 > 3 > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Type=VN Info | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Length | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | > | > | Originating NVE's IP Address > | > | (128 bits) > | > | > | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Resv (8 bits) | VN ID (24 bits) | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Resv (12 bits) | Local MPLS Label (20 bits) | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > : > : > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Resv (8 bits) | VN ID (24 bits) | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Resv (12 bits) | Local MPLS Label (20 bits) | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > > > So you are assuming to use the list of VNs. If a NVE participate in 20 VNs (or > more for TOR based NVE), there will be 20* (4 bytes). Yes, if there are too many VN instances, they could be listed in more than one TLV. > Correct? > > Why need to list the Local MPLS Label? What if there is no MPLS used? The MPLS label would be useful only in the case where the VNs are identified by MPLS labels on the data plane. the MPLS label could be set to zero if there is no MPLS used. Best regards, Xiaohu > Linda > > -----Original Message----- > From: Xuxiaohu > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 3:30 AM > To: Tom Herbert; Linda Dunbar > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [nvo3] is it resonsable that > draft-dunbar-nvo3-nva-mapping-distribution-01 suggests NVE using bit-map to > represent its supported VNs? > > > > Therefore, I think it is better to have a flag indicating if the VNs > > > are listed individually, Upper/Lower ranges, or bit mapped. > > > > > I wouldn't use a flag for that, it's probably cleaner to define > > another TLV type that gives a list of VNIDs. Either the list or bit-map can > > be > used interchangeably. > > There has been a draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-nvo3-isis-cp-00) > talking about that approach. By the way, we have implemented a demo on > Quagga (installed on Ubuntu) which is capable of interworking with OVS. > > Best regards, > Xiaohu > > > Tom > > > > > > > > > > > Any other suggestions? > > > > > > > > > > > > Linda > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > nvo3 mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > nvo3 mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
