Re: [armd] soliciting typical network designs for ARMD

[Linda Dunbar <[e-mail]>]

Vishwas,

In my mind the bullet 1) in the list refers to ToR switches downstream ports
(facing servers) running Layer 2 and ToR uplinks ports run IP Layer 3.

Have you seen data center networks with ToR switches downstream ports (i.e.
facing servers) enabling IP routing, even though the physical links are
Ethernet?
If yes, we should definitely include it in the ARMD draft.

Thanks,
Linda
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Vishwas Manral <[e-mail]>wrote:

> Hi Linda,
> I am unsure what you mean by this, but:
>
>    1. layer 3 all the way to TOR (Top of Rack switches),
>
> We can also have a heirarchical network, with the core totally Layer-3 (and
> having seperate routing), from the hosts still in a large Layer-3 subnet.
> Another aspect could be to have a totally Layer-3 network.
>
> The difference between them is the link between the servers and the ToR.
>
> Thanks,
> Vishwas
>   On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Linda Dunbar <[e-mail]>wrote:
>
>> During the 81st IETF ARMD WG discussion, it was suggested that it is
>> necessary to document typical data center network designs so that address
>> resolution scaling issues can be properly described. Many data center
>> operators have expressed that they can't openly reveal their detailed
>> network designs. Therefore, we only want to document anonymous designs
>> without too much detail. During the journey of establishing ARMD, we have
>> come across the following typical data center network designs:
>>
>>    1. layer 3 all the way to TOR (Top of Rack switches),
>>    2. large layer 2 with hundreds (or thousands) of ToRs being
>>    interconnected by Layer 2. This design will have thousands of hosts under
>>    the L2/L3 boundary router (s)
>>    3. CLOS design  with thousands of switches. This design will have
>>    thousands of hosts under the L2/L3 boundary router(s)
>>
>> We have heard that each of the designs above has its own problems. ARMD
>> problem statements might need to document DC problems under each typical
>> design.
>> Please send feedback to us (either to the armd email list  or to the ARMD
>> chair Benson & Linda) to indicate if we have missed any typical Data Center
>> network designs.
>>
>> Your contribution can greatly accelerate the progress of ARMD WG.
>>
>> Thank you very much.
>>
>> Linda & Benson
>>
>