Hello,
> On May 4, 2015, at 5:01 PM, Behcet Sarikaya <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi VXLAN-gpe authors, > > After reading many times and discussions with one of the 12 coauthors :) > I think I now understand better this draft. > > The source of misunderstanding was the lack of problem statement. My > suggestion is to clearly define what this draft is intended to solve. > > Due to the fact that VXLAN is mentioned so much and Section is almost > copied from RFC 7248 causes a lot of confusion. > > What I understand is that this draft is addressing is non Layer 2 data > center networks. VXLAN addresses Layer 2 data center networks and > always assumes Ethernet frames in the payload. > Virtual machines always generate Layer 2 frames. VXLAN addresses > VM-to-VM communication. > > In general not all data center networks are Layer based, i.e. some are > Layer 3 based and there are no VMs that's why VXLAN-GPE does not talk > about VMs. > > I suggest that this point be clarified in the draft. > The introduction of the draft states the following: "The VXLAN header does not specify the protocol being encapsulated and therefore is currently limited to encapsulating only Ethernet frame payloads." " This document describes extending VXLAN to support additional payload types beyond Ethernet frames.." Is this unclear? If so, what do you propose? _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
