On 1/30/2017 2:17 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > > Joe, > > > > Thanks for your suggestion. > > > > I added the following sentence in the Section 3 (Multicast Mechanisms > in networks that use NVO3): > > > > /What makes NVO3 different from any other network is that some NVEs, > especially the NVE implemented on server, might not support PIM or other / > native...
> /multicast mechanisms. They might just encapsulate the data packets > from VMs with an outer / > /unicast/ > > /header. Therefore, it is important for networks using NVO3 to have > mechanisms / > /to support multicast as a network capability/ > > /for NVEs, / > /(omit the following):/ > > /especially the ones that do not support multicast, / > /(end omit)/ > > /to map / > /network/ > > /multicast traffic from VMs (users/applications) to / > /an equivalent multicast capability inside the NVE, (then omit the following:) / > > /proper Outer Header, / > /(end omit)/ > > /e.g. figuring out the outer destination address if NVE does not support/ > /native/ > > /multicast (e.g. PIM)./ > or IGMP. > // > > > > > > If it is Okay with you, I will upload the draft. > > > > Thanks, Linda > > > > *From:*Joe Touch [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 2017年1月30日14:02 > *To:* Linda Dunbar <[email protected]>; Olufemi Komolafe > <[email protected]>; Anoop Ghanwani <[email protected]>; Bocci, > Matthew (Nokia - GB) <[email protected]> > *Cc:* MBONED WG <[email protected]>; Truman Boyes > <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> <[email protected]>; Williamson, > Beau <[email protected]>; Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [nvo3] [MBONED] NVO3 Multicast Framework > > > > > > > > On 1/30/2017 11:38 AM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > > Joe, > > > > You asked: > > What makes NVO3 different from any other network? > > > > Answer: Some NVEs, especially the NVE implemented on server, > don’t support PIM or other multicast mechanism. They just > encapsulate the data packets from VMs with an outer header. > > Then the requirement would be: > NVO3 does not require native multicast, but does require supported > multicast capability. > > > The “UNIQUE needs of NVO3” is to have the mechanism for NVEs > (especially the ones that don’t support multicast) to map > multicast traffic from VMs (users/applications) to proper Outer > Header. E.g. if NVE doesn’t support multicast (PIM), what outer > destination address should be. > > > That needs to be explained in detail, especially for ways to support > multicast without PIM. > > > All we need is to differentiate multicast messages originated > from users/applications from the infrastructure multicast at the > introduction section. Not intended to describe in detail of the > Infrastructure multicast. > > > > I don’t understand how RFC3819 (Advice for Internet Subnetwork > Designs) can be used. RFC 3819 talks about MTU, TCP/link > retransmission, etc. > > > See sections 5 and 6. > > Joe > > > > > > > Linda Dunbar > > > > > > *From:*Joe Touch [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 2017年1月30日12:42 > *To:* Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Olufemi Komolafe > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>; Anoop > Ghanwani <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>; > Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> > *Cc:* MBONED WG <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>; Truman > Boyes <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>; > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Williamson, Beau > <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Dino Farinacci > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [nvo3] [MBONED] NVO3 Multicast Framework > > > > Note: most of what you want to say about multicast has already > been observed in RFC 3819. > > The discussion in section 1.1 should refer to LANE (RFC1577) as an > example. > > However, before we get down into this in detail, I have to ask: > what makes NVO3 different from any other network? > > This WG doesn't need one doc for everything an NVO3 network needs > that a network already needs. The docs should focus on the UNIQUE > needs of NVO3 or ways in which NVO3 provides multicast that are > not available in generic networks. > > The rest of the discussion of the need for multicast, etc., ought > to cite existing RFCs. > > Joe > > On 1/30/2017 10:35 AM, Joe Touch wrote: > > Hi, Linda, > > This isn't correct grammar. > > Do you want to say: > > /Infrastructure multicast /*is a capability needed by > */networking services//, such as Address Resolution Protocol > (ARP), Neighbor Discovery (ND), Dynamic Host Configuration > Protocol (DHCP), multicast Domain Name Server (mDNS), etc../ > > Joe > > On 1/30/2017 10:21 AM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > > Joe, > > > > Are you ok with the following? > > > > /Infrastructure multicast are //for networking services//, > such as Address Resolution Protocol (ARP), Neighbor > Discovery (ND), Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol > (DHCP), multicast Domain Name Server (mDNS), etc../ > > > > Linda > > > > *From:*Joe Touch [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 2017年1月30日12:03 > *To:* Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Olufemi Komolafe > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>; > Anoop Ghanwani <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - > GB) <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> > *Cc:* MBONED WG <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Truman Boyes > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>; > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Williamson, Beau > <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Dino Farinacci > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [nvo3] [MBONED] NVO3 Multicast Framework > > > > I'd suggest "networking services", only to avoid the > implication that these are all L3. > > Joe > > > > On 1/30/2017 9:58 AM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > > Joe, > > > > Do you mean the following? > > > > /Infrastructure multicast are originated by network > //services //for the purpose of establishing network > topology and reachability, such as Address Resolution > Protocol (ARP), Neighbor Discovery (ND), Dynamic Host > Configuration Protocol (DHCP), multicast Domain Name > Server (mDNS), etc../ > > > > Linda > > > > *From:*Joe Touch [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 2017年1月30日11:49 > *To:* Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Olufemi Komolafe > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>; > Anoop Ghanwani <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Bocci, Matthew (Nokia > - GB) <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> > *Cc:* MBONED WG <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Truman Boyes > <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Williamson, Beau > <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Dino Farinacci > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [nvo3] [MBONED] NVO3 Multicast Framework > > > > Hi, Linda, > > These are not all "network protocols", as I noted already. > > It might be useful to describe them all as "services", > though. > > I.e., to replate "network protocols" with "services" > (or maybe even "networking services" - to distinguish > them from OS services, but not give the impression > they belong at the "network" layer). > > Joe > > > > On 1/30/2017 8:17 AM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > > Joe, > > > > Thank you very much for articulating a more > precise definition. > > > > How about this: > > /Infrastructure multicast are originated by > network //protocols //for the purpose of > establishing network topology and reachability, > such as Address Resolution Protocol (ARP), > Neighbor Discovery (ND), Dynamic Host > Configuration Protocol (DHCP), multicast Domain > Name Server (mDNS), etc../ > > > > /Application-specific multicast traffic are > originated and consumed by user applications./ > > Linda > > > > *From:*Joe Touch [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 2017年1月27日18:20 > *To:* Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Olufemi Komolafe > <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Anoop Ghanwani > <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Bocci, Matthew > (Nokia - GB) <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> > *Cc:* MBONED WG <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Truman Boyes > <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Williamson, Beau > <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]>; Dino > Farinacci <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [nvo3] [MBONED] NVO3 Multicast > Framework > > > > > > > > On 1/27/2017 4:03 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > > /[Linda] //Infrastructure multicast are > originated by network nodes for the purpose of > establishing network topology and > reachability, such as Address Resolution > Protocol (ARP), Neighbor Discovery (ND), > Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP), > multicast Domain Name Server (mDNS), etc../ > > + Also, how would you classify protocols like > OSPF, PIM, VRRP etc that are dependent on > multicast? Even if you do not consider them > relevant for this framework, perhaps you > should briefly mention them? > > /[Linda] I don’t think we can enumerate all > network protocols (many of them use > multicast). The purpose is to differentiate > multicast originated by network nodes and the > multicast originated by applications. / > > DHCP and mDNS are applications ("L7"). > > Network nodes don't originate anything; their > protocol layers do (link, network, transport, > application). > > It might be useful to focus on the difference > being "network infrastructure" vs "user > applications" as the better way to describe the > difference. I don't think "network nodes vs. > applications" is clear or meaningful. > > Joe > > > > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
