IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Apn] should add the gap analysis for GENEVE (RFC8926)

"Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)" <pengshuping@huawei.com> Fri, 19 March 2021 08:24 UTC

Return-Path: <pengshuping@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: apn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2863A16E5; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 01:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fAQwknPFkoPn; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 01:24:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AD7E3A16E4; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 01:24:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml706-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.206]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4F1xdY6Gnvz6818v; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 16:19:45 +0800 (CST)
Received: from fraeml706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.55) by fraeml706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2106.2; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 09:24:23 +0100
Received: from DGGEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.50) by fraeml706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.2106.2 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 09:24:22 +0100
Received: from DGGEML512-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.49]) by dggeml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.3.17.50]) with mapi id 14.03.0513.000; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 16:24:20 +0800
From: "Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)" <pengshuping@huawei.com>
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>, "draft-peng-apn-scope-gap-analysis@ietf.org" <draft-peng-apn-scope-gap-analysis@ietf.org>, "apn@ietf.org" <apn@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: should add the gap analysis for GENEVE (RFC8926)
Thread-Index: AdccUkbaMIFshIzhRci6WKwwf8chKwARl3NA
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 08:24:20 +0000
Message-ID: <4278D47A901B3041A737953BAA078ADE199E8C18@dggeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <SN6PR13MB2334C4F7D2306EF8907229F485699@SN6PR13MB2334.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <SN6PR13MB2334C4F7D2306EF8907229F485699@SN6PR13MB2334.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.153.195.12]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4278D47A901B3041A737953BAA078ADE199E8C18dggeml512mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apn/AeUnGyLPqzKG7PJ8jekH2MJs-AU>
Subject: Re: [Apn] should add the gap analysis for GENEVE (RFC8926)
X-BeenThere: apn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Application-aware Networking <apn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apn>, <mailto:apn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/apn/>
List-Post: <mailto:apn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apn>, <mailto:apn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 08:24:30 -0000

Hi Linda,

Thank you!

GENEVE can be taken into account when carrying the APN attribute. The encapsulation with it seems more to be a solution that needs to be developed rather than a gap analysis to be added. How do you think?

Best regards,
Shuping

From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:linda.dunbar@futurewei.com]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 7:56 AM
To: draft-peng-apn-scope-gap-analysis@ietf.org; apn@ietf.org
Subject: should add the gap analysis for GENEVE (RFC8926)

Shuping, et al,

I think that the draft-peng-apn-scope-gap-analysis should add the gap analysis for GENEVE (RFC8926).

GENEVE has been used very widely among Cloud networks. For example, you can have a GENEVE encapsulated flows to Firewalls. You can attach App related Meta data to the GENEVE header, so that the nodes along the way can do the needed processing.



Geneve Header:
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |Ver|  Opt Len  |O|C|    Rsvd.  |          Protocol Type        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |        Virtual Network Identifier (VNI)       |    Reserved   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      ~                    Variable-Length Options                    ~
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

If there are reasons that GENEVE can't be used, it is better to document those reasons in the Gap analysis.

Linda Dunbar

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email