Alia, ack 100%. I’m just hanging in the bleachers with my helmet strapped on 
and waiting for IDR & L2VPN wizards to open the fray but so far stuff’s been 
astonishingly quiet ;-)   tony

From: Alia Atlas [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 8:23 AM
To: Antoni Przygienda
Cc: Hannes Gredler; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: WG review for draft-lapukhov-bgp-routing-large-dc

Hi Tony,

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Antoni Przygienda 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> hi antoni,
>
> i am all for accepting it as a WG item - IMO its an excellent proofpoint that
> really large datacenters can be run based on exisiting protocols and
[Tony said]  Hannes, yepp, first, work's interesting & fact that it works gives 
it its own merit, should be possibly taken up by someone IMO. My points were 
though:

        1. I didn't see 'running large datacenters' as something on RTGWG 
charter and it's also typically something that is first driven by larger set of 
requirements rather than a single datapoint.

As I said earlier, this falls into the other work and handling individual 
drafts without a home.  It's a way of getting the review and consensus for 
drafts that would otherwise be AD-sponsored.  I agree that this is a change 
from how rtgwg has been used in the past.

        2. A blueprint of a particular solution is exactly that.  It is not a 
generic protocol specification or guideline that will fi t e'one. If you have 
multi-TS which bring their own existing addresses or need MAC mobility or have 
to run L2 applications or don't have BGP implementation with necessary twists 
or other tid-nits which tons of DC happen to carry about then the shoe may not 
fit.

Absolutely - this is a starting point that gives one idea.

> even getting to 10000s of routing nodes is not the end of the world.
>
[Tony said]  We know that from a running thing called the 'Internet'  ;-P  I 
know I took it out the context but I couldn't resist the tongue-in-cheek pun 
possible ;-)

Again, looking fwd' to presentation and discussion on the floor.

Please - start the discussion here and now!  I was delighted to see how many 
people were clearly familiar with the work and thought it was a good idea to 
discuss.  Let's get some good reviews and suggestions so the draft can be much 
better before the next IETF.

Alia


--- tony

_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to