The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Network Virtualization Overlays (NVO3) Encapsulation Considerations'
(draft-ietf-nvo3-encap-12.txt) as Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Network Virtualization Overlays Working
Group.
The IESG contact persons are Jim Guichard
The IESG has received a request from the Network Virtualization Overlays WG
(nvo3) to consider the following document: - 'Network Virtualization Overlays
(NVO3) Encapsulation Considerations'
as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
entropy value to
do flow steering. If not trust, then revert to RSS.
BR
Lizhong
-Original Message-
From: Tom Herbert [mailto:t...@herbertland.com]
Sent: 2015年4月17日 6:04
To: Erik Nordmark
Cc: Lizhong Jin; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On Wed, Apr 15
Hi Carlos,
Thank you for the response, please se inline.
From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) [mailto:cpign...@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 8:27 PM
To: Lucy yong
Cc: Erik Nordmark; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
Hi Lucy,
Thanks for the follow-up
@ietf.org
mailto:nvo3@ietf.org nvo3@ietf.org mailto:nvo3@ietf.org, Lucy yong
lucy.y...@huawei.com mailto:lucy.y...@huawei.com, Lizhong Jin
lizho@gmail.com mailto:lizho@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On Apr 10, 2015, at 3:49 PM, Larry Kreeger (kreeger
(cpignata) [mailto:cpign...@cisco.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2015 12:46 PM
To: Lucy yong
Cc: Erik Nordmark; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
Lucy,
Please see inline.
Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro.
Excuze typofraphicak errows
On Apr 10, 2015, at 18:22, Lucy yong
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Erik Nordmark nordm...@acm.org wrote:
On 4/9/15 10:56 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Erik Nordmark nordm...@acm.org wrote:
I thought the purpose of RFS was to send the packet (and associated
interrupt) to the CPU where the application
On 4/9/15 10:56 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Erik Nordmark nordm...@acm.org wrote:
I thought the purpose of RFS was to send the packet (and associated
interrupt) to the CPU where the application process is running. That implies
an exact flow lookup. Some hash value,
lizho@gmail.commailto:lizho@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On Apr 10, 2015, at 3:49 PM, Larry Kreeger (kreeger)
kree...@cisco.commailto:kree...@cisco.com wrote:
I thought Path MTU discovery was used to set the MSS in the TCP stack. I just
wasn't sure
: Friday, April 10, 2015 2:51 PM
To: Lucy yong
Cc: Erik Nordmark; nvo3@ietf.orgmailto:nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
Lucy,
On Mar 25, 2015, at 5:23 PM, Lucy yong
lucy.y...@huawei.commailto:lucy.y...@huawei.com wrote:
Here is a suggestion to the draft
.
Tom
Regards
Lizhong
-Original Message-
From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:nordm...@sonic.net]
Sent: 2015年3月26日 5:01
To: nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
I presented part of this at the most recent NVO3 interim meeting.The full
12
areas
consideration might be a noop).
Thanks,
— Carlos.
Thanks,
Lucy
-Original Message-
From: nvo3 [mailto:nvo3-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Erik Nordmark
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:01 PM
To: nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
I presented part
an...@alumni.duke.edu
Date: Friday, April 10, 2015 12:10 PM
To: Larry Kreeger kree...@cisco.com
Cc: Lizhong Jin lizho@gmail.com, Lucy yong lucy.y...@huawei.com,
Erik Nordmark nordm...@acm.org, nvo3@ietf.org nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
Even for TCP it depends
Hi Carlos,
-Original Message-
From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) [mailto:cpign...@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 2:51 PM
To: Lucy yong
Cc: Erik Nordmark; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
Lucy,
On Mar 25, 2015, at 5:23 PM, Lucy yong
lucy.y
-Original Message-
From: Lucy yong
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 11:44 PM
To: Xuxiaohu; 'Erik Nordmark'; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
This is related to my early comment. The draft needs point out transport
related
encapsulation
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Erik Nordmark nordm...@acm.org wrote:
On 4/8/15 8:11 PM, Lizhong Jin wrote:
[Lizhong] If the NVE and tenant is integrated into one device, then the
issue could
be solved by implementation. Because tenant know the entropy value of the
first
segment, and use
On 4/8/15 8:11 PM, Lizhong Jin wrote:
[Lizhong] If the NVE and tenant is integrated into one device, then the issue
could
be solved by implementation. Because tenant know the entropy value of the first
segment, and use the same value to the subsequent segment. So different
implementation model
] Encapsulation considerations
Hi Erik,
As it has said in the draft : ... We later expanded the scope somewhat to
consider how the encapsulations would play with MPLS transport, which is
important because SFC and BIER seem to target being dependent of the underlying
transport..., it would be necessary
if we really need to uniquely identify the flow.
Tom
Regards
Lizhong
-Original Message-
From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:nordm...@sonic.net]
Sent: 2015年3月26日 5:01
To: nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
I presented part of this at the most recent NVO3 interim
Hi Tom,
See inline below.
Regards
Lizhong
-Original Message-
From: Tom Herbert [mailto:t...@herbertland.com]
Sent: 2015年4月9日 8:20
To: Lizhong Jin
Cc: Erik Nordmark; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Lizhong Jin lizho
is
different.
Thanks,
Erik
Regards
Lizhong
-Original Message-
From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:nordm...@sonic.net]
Sent: 2015年3月26日 5:01
To: nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
I presented part of this at the most recent NVO3 interim meeting.The full
12
areas
-Original Message-
From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:nordm...@acm.org]
Sent: 2015年4月9日 8:27
To: Lizhong Jin; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On 4/7/15 12:02 AM, Lizhong Jin wrote:
Hi Erik,
Thanks for the draft. I suggest to add one consideration
Hi Erik,
-Original Message-
From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:nordm...@acm.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 8:05 AM
To: Xuxiaohu; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On 4/7/15 7:15 PM, Xuxiaohu wrote:
Hi Erik,
As it has said in the draft : ... We
steering based on the inner header information, then it could use
entropy value instead of the inner header information.
Regards
Lizhong
-Original Message-
From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:nordm...@sonic.net]
Sent: 2015年3月26日 5:01
To: nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
network transport.
Thanks,
Lucy
From: Larry Kreeger (kreeger) [mailto:kree...@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:53 PM
To: Anoop Ghanwani; Lucy yong
Cc: Erik Nordmark; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
Hi Anoop,
IMO, the encapsulation includes both the VXLAN
[mailto:nordm...@acm.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 11:58 PM
To: Lucy yong; Erik Nordmark; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On 3/30/15 1:16 PM, Lucy yong wrote:
Hi Eric,
Here is my thought.
Congestion considerations, Header Protection, Entropy, MTU
, 2015 10:27 AM
To: Erik Nordmark; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
Hi Eric,
A service might be too generic and cause ambiguous. It means an encapsulation
for non-tunneling purpose. Thus, one type of encapsulation is for tunneling
purpose, which is transport related
@ietf.orgmailto:nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
I'm having trouble separating encapsulations into the categories mentioned.
When we talk about an encapsulation for NVO3 does it include the VXLAN header
only, or does it include the UDP header as well? Am I allowed
,
Erik
Regards,
Lucy
-Original Message-
From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:nordm...@acm.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 12:32 AM
To: Lucy yong; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On 3/25/15 2:23 PM, Lucy yong wrote:
Here is a suggestion to the draft
...@acm.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 12:32 AM
To: Lucy yong; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On 3/25/15 2:23 PM, Lucy yong wrote:
Here is a suggestion to the draft.
There are two distinct encapsulation purposes.
1) an encapsulation for tunneling purpose, i.e
model may only apply to the encapsulation for a service.
Regards,
Lucy
-Original Message-
From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:nordm...@acm.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 12:32 AM
To: Lucy yong; nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Encapsulation considerations
On 3/25/15 2:23 PM, Lucy yong
I presented part of this at the most recent NVO3 interim meeting.The
full 12 areas of considerations where presented at RTGWG earlier this week.
The draft is
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rtg-dt-encap/
and the slides are at
32 matches
Mail list logo
