I'm having trouble separating encapsulations into the categories mentioned.
When we talk about an encapsulation for NVO3 does it include the VXLAN header only, or does it include the UDP header as well? Am I allowed to use the VXLAN header on an MPLS tunnel? I'm not proposing we do this, just trying to see if there is a better way to communicate this separation. Anoop On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Lucy yong <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > Here is my thought. > > Congestion considerations, Header Protection, Entropy, MTU and > Fragmentation, and QoS are specific for an encapsulation for tunneling. > > Next-protocol, OAM, extensibility, Security, layering, and middle-box are > applied to both types of encapsulations. > > Service model may only apply to the encapsulation for a service. > > Regards, > Lucy > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 12:32 AM > To: Lucy yong; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations > > On 3/25/15 2:23 PM, Lucy yong wrote: > > Here is a suggestion to the draft. > > > > There are two distinct encapsulation purposes. > > 1) an encapsulation for tunneling purpose, i.e. transport related > encapsulation, e.g. nvo3. > > 2) an encapsulation for a service, i.e. transport independent > encapsulation, e.g. sfc. > > > > Considerations for two types of encapsulations have difference. It is > good for the draft to point out that and give separate considerations. > > Lucy, > > which considerations in the draft are different for the two types you > suggest? > > Thanks, > Erik > > > > > Thanks, > > Lucy > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: nvo3 [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Erik Nordmark > > Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:01 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations > > > > > > I presented part of this at the most recent NVO3 interim meeting.The > full 12 areas of considerations where presented at RTGWG earlier this week. > > The draft is > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rtg-dt-encap/ > > and the slides are at > > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/92/slides/slides-92-rtgwg-8.pdf > > > > There is probably additional things in there to consider for NVO3, and > advice that can be reused to make it easier to move NVO3 forward. > > > > Regards, > > Erik > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
