On 7/14/16 7:03 PM, Xuxiaohu wrote:
IETF has published two informational RFCs dedicated for NVo3 data plane
encapsulation, one is RFC7348 (i.e., VXLAN) and the other is RFC7637 (i.e.,
NVGRE). Both of them have been implemented and deployed. Of course, each has
its own flaw. The former has no protocol type field
(https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nvo3/current/msg01520.html) and the
latter' ECMP capability is not good enough.
Xiaohu,
A minor nit is that it was the Independent Stream Editor at the RFC Editor who
published these documents, not the IETF.
In most cases that doesn't make a difference.
Regards,
Erik
If the NVo3 WG still wants to publish some RFCs on NVo3 data plane
encapsulation, it seems reasonable to build on the above two approaches and fix
their flaws accordingly. VXLAN-GPE is designed to fix the flaw of VXLAN
although whether or not to use a different port number than VXLAN's port number
is still controversial. Personally, I prefer to the approach as defined in
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yong-l3vpn-nvgre-vxlan-encap-03#page-3)
since it seem much simpler than the current approach as defined in
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-quinn-vxlan-gpe-03#page-8). GRE-in-UDP is a
very good choice to fix the flow of NVGRE.
Best regards,
Xiaohu
-----Original Message-----
From: nvo3 [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Black, David
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 2:42 AM
To: Manish Kumar (manishkr); NVO3
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Mail regarding NVO3 data plane drafts
I believe GRE(+UDP) deserves a discussion as well.
FYI - over in TSVWG, this GRE/UDP draft is standards track and has completed
WG Last Call:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-gre-in-udp-encap/
Thanks, --David
-----Original Message-----
From: nvo3 [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Manish Kumar
(manishkr)
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 12:54 PM
To: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB); NVO3
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Mail regarding NVO3 data plane drafts
Hi Matthew,
I agree this is an important aspect that’s just lingering around.
Although not being adopted and not a part of the WG, if there is a
discussion on pros-cons/merits- demerits, I believe GRE(+UDP) deserves
a discussion as well. For that matter, it may be worth having a broader
discussion!
Thanks,
Manish
On 14/07/16 9:51 pm, "nvo3 on behalf of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)"
<nvo3- [email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
WG,
The NVO3 working group has adopted three data plane encapsulations:
- VXLAN-GPE,
- Geneve,
- GUE (although the draft is moving to the Intarea WG, we
anticipate that
NVO3 will still reference this).
We have discussed this situation with Alia and we feel that there is
little benefit
to the community in publishing all three as standards track RFCs.
We would note that the discussion on the drafts has been relatively
light since
their adoption. There has not been serious discussion about their
relative pros/cons (if any), or about the actual usefulness of their
extensibility or differentiators.
This leaves two options:
1) Publish all of them as informational or experimental, potentially
moving one
of them to standards track in the future based on
implementation/deployment.
2) Pick one now based on technical and/or implementation/deployment
criteria.
We would therefore like to gain a sense of what the WG would like to
do with
these drafts.
Please post your comments to the list. We also have a slot to on the
NVO3
agenda in Berlin where we would like to continue this discussion.
Best regards,
Matthew and Sam
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
