Hi Xiaohu,

this is an interesting topic and there has been other research works
as well. I find it more appealing to use L3 in data centers and that
is doable if the identifier/locator split is applied. Instead of
finding a path from endpoint A to endpoint B the the path is
established from endpoint A to service instance B.
You might find these links interesting
http://sns.cs.princeton.edu/projects/scaffold/
http://netseminar.stanford.edu/past_seminars/seminars/freedman-scaffold.pdf

Patrick


2011/5/13 Xu Xiaohu <[email protected]>:
> Hi Tony and all,
>
> In the past few years, RRG has done a lot of excellent research work to
> explore various ideas and approaches (e.g., map&encap, id/locator split and
> translation...) to addressing the Internet routing scalability issue. Today
> it seems that the cloud Data Center Network (DCN) and Data Center
> Interconnection (DCI) scenarios are facing a similar scalability challenge
> (i.e., MAC forwarding table scalability issue). The demand for VM mobility
> within the whole large L2 data center network or even across geographically
> dispersed data centers is one major driving force of extending the L2 domain
> scope larger and larger.
>
> Although the reason for the MAC forwarding table scalability issue in the
> DCN/DCI scenarios is not the same as that for the Internet routing
> scalability issue, the ideas and approaches suitable for scaling the
> Internet routing system could be utilized to deal with the MAC forwarding
> table scalability issue. There are already many such attempts in reality,
> especially in the academic circle. VL2 , SEATTLE and MOOSE are good examples
> of them.
>
> Hence I suggest we spend some time to consider whether we could utilize our
> experience which was obtained from the past and ongoing Internet routing
> scalability solution research to address the similar scalability issue
> existed in the DCN/DCI scenarios, for example, we could attempt or even
> develop those familiar ideas or approaches mentioned above to address the
> MAC table scalability issue in the DCN/DCI scenarios.
>
> Best regards,
> Xiaohu
>
>
>> -----邮件原件-----
>> 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Tony Li
>> 发送时间: 2011年5月9日 1:18
>> 收件人: [email protected]
>> 主题: [rrg] Next topic?
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> It's time to start the conversation about where the RRG is headed.
> Towards
>> that end, I'd like to open the floor for the discussion of topics.  Any
> _research_
>> topic within the broad area of routing and addressing is appropriate.
>>
>> I propose the following process: we hold this discussion this month,
> trying to
>> identify relevant topics.  Each topic should have a succinct statement of
> its
>> goals.  At the end of the month, we poll to determine the interest level
> in the
>> various topics.  Those that seem to have critical mass are recommended to
>> the IRTF Chair for consideration.
>>
>> The default answer, if no topic has critical mass, is for the RG to go on
> hiatus.
>>
>> Any questions or comments on the process?
>>
>> Any proposals of research topics?
>>
>> The floor is open...
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rrg mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
>
> _______________________________________________
> rrg mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
>
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg

Reply via email to