Re: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

Linda Dunbar <ldunbar@huawei.com> Thu, 26 August 2010 15:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ldunbar@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: arp222@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: arp222@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 826AD3A69E4 for <arp222@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.284
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.284 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.314, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ViP2XgK+TA9R for <arp222@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usaga04-in.huawei.com (usaga04-in.huawei.com [206.16.17.180]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B50403A6994 for <arp222@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 08:38:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (usaga04-in [172.18.4.101]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0L7R009YDNGU9N@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for arp222@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:38:55 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from L735042 ([10.124.12.75]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0L7R00BC8NGS8D@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for arp222@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:38:54 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:38:52 -0500
From: Linda Dunbar <ldunbar@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <5B40D077-0171-4316-8606-4F26DC611EA1@queuefull.net>
To: 'Benson Schliesser' <bensons@queuefull.net>
Message-id: <003001cb4534$c9f629c0$4b0c7c0a@china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3664
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_/Q+pMqBtmkHHw9ePGWC8zA)"
Thread-index: ActD7iRFQr0cG+XoTPqjf5ef4htkIwBPwHWQ
References: <00bc01cb3b1f$a12fa3f0$480c7c0a@china.huawei.com> <5EB1A55E180C914BBC1A49310B76293863830E1558@HQ1-EXCH02.corp.brocade.com> <010401cb3b30$95a41aa0$480c7c0a@china.huawei.com> <5EB1A55E180C914BBC1A49310B76293863830E1610@HQ1-EXCH02.corp.brocade.com> <005d01cb430a$be756650$4b0c7c0a@china.huawei.com> <5EB1A55E180C914BBC1A49310B762938638616B395@HQ1-EXCH02.corp.brocade.com> <000201cb43c3$04a5ce90$4b0c7c0a@china.huawei.com> <5EB1A55E180C914BBC1A49310B762938638616B6AB@HQ1-EXCH02.corp.brocade.com> <005901cb43db$b59523a0$4b0c7c0a@china.huawei.com> <5B40D077-0171-4316-8606-4F26DC611EA1@queuefull.net>
Cc: arp222@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones
X-BeenThere: arp222@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." <arp222.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/arp222>, <mailto:arp222-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/arp222>
List-Post: <mailto:arp222@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:arp222-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/arp222>, <mailto:arp222-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:38:39 -0000

Benson, 

 

Definitely VLAN should be used to differentiate different subnets. 

 

In the Cloud Computing environment, client subnets are added and removed
very frequently and the number of (virtual) hosts in client subnets is very
different. 

If each client subnet is mapped to one VLAN, then each layer 2 can only
support up to 4095 clients

The physical servers and network gears in each Layer 2 don't change very
often. But the client subnets come and go very frequently. 

Therefore, restricting one dedicated VLAN for each client can cause some
servers/network under utilized and others over loaded.

 

Linda

 

 

  _____  

From: Benson Schliesser [mailto:bensons@queuefull.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 7:40 PM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: 'Anoop Ghanwani'; arp222@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

This is pretty much what a VLAN solves for you; it multiplexes link-layer
segments.

 

The scenario you've described is missing an abstraction layer.  You're
apparently trying to get around the need for VLANs, rather than improve
their scale.  I'd suggest this really is not the right way to think about
VLAN scale limitations.

 

Cheers,

-Benson

 

 

On 24 Aug 10, at 5:28 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote:





Anoop, 

 

I am referring to duplicated IP addresses but with different MAC addresses. 

 

Linda

 

  _____  

From: Anoop Ghanwani [mailto:anoop@brocade.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 3:37 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; arp222@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

Linda,

 

I think the key piece of information that I'm missing is how

the layer 2 forwarding takes place in a particular client-controlled

subnet.  If it's just regular bridging, we will have leakage of traffic

between subnets that are in the same VLAN.  In that case, I think

it would be hard to solve the duplicate address problem.  If there

is some kind of new forwarding happens that ensures that there

is never leakage between the subnets, and the two subnets never

need to talk to each other unless they use a NAT, then there

is nothing to be solved...that problem already exists today with

VRFs.  But I don't know of such a layer 2 device and that's why

I was asking for more details.

 

Anoop

 

From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:ldunbar@huawei.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 12:32 PM
To: Anoop Ghanwani; arp222@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

Anoop, 

 

The issue of duplicated IP addresses comes up when there are more client
controlled subnets than the number of VLANs. The number of client controlled
subnets could be in hundreds of thousands, but there are only 4095 VLANs
within one Layer 2. Then you might need to assign multiple client controlled
subnets in one VLAN. Under this scenario, duplicated IP will be an issue. 

 

Linda 

 

  _____  

From: Anoop Ghanwani [mailto:anoop@brocade.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 4:36 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; arp222@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

Linda,

 

If it broadcasts from one client controlled subnet do not

show up in another client controlled subnet, then this

should be a non-issue, no?

 

Anoop

 

From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:ldunbar@huawei.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 2:33 PM
To: Anoop Ghanwani; arp222@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

Anoop, 

 

No, it shouldn't. 

 

Linda

 

  _____  

From: Anoop Ghanwani [mailto:anoop@brocade.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 6:19 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; arp222@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

Linda,

 

Do broadcasts from one client controlled subnet show up

in a different client controlled subnet?

 

Anoop

 

From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:ldunbar@huawei.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 2:44 PM
To: Anoop Ghanwani; arp222@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

Anoop, 

 

The scenario is Cloud Computing service selling client controlled (virtual)
subnets to clients. All the (virtual) hosts within the client controlled
subnets have their own IP addresses. The communications among those
(virtual) hosts are client specific. There might be same IP addresses in
different client controlled subnets. All those hosts will be assigned as a
virtual machine to a physical server and assigned to a VLAN in the actual
network in data center(s). There will be cases when one VLAN ends up having
(virtual) hosts with same IP address (but different MAC address). 

 

Linda 

 

  _____  

From: Anoop Ghanwani [mailto:anoop@brocade.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 4:02 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; arp222@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

Hi Linda,

 

Would it be possible to provide references to actual protocols

that require duplicate IP addresses behind different MAC addresses?

 

Anoop

 

From: arp222-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:arp222-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Linda Dunbar
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 12:42 PM
To: arp222@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [arp222] ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

I forgot to clarify in my previous email that the charter statement and
milestones posted is for soliciting feedback before submitting to IESG to
request for a BOF for IETF79 (Beijing).  

We think the problem domain belongs to Internet Area. Therefore, once I get
your feedback, I will send the Charter Statement and milestones to the
Internet ADS (Ralph and Jari) to request for a BOF at the IETF79 (Beijing).
Our target is to have a working group by IETF 80.   

 

Linda Dunbar

 

  _____  

From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:ldunbar@huawei.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 6:14 PM
To: 'arp222@ietf.org'
Subject: ARP222 Charter statement and milestones

 

Thank you all for coming to ARP222 Bar BOF at the 78th IETF and giving us
comments and suggestions on and between sessions. 

 

I put together the initial ARP222 Charter Statement and Milestones. Please
provide comments and suggestions.  

 

 

 

 

ARP 222: Address Resolution Protocol for Layer 2 to Anything to Layer 2

 

Description of Working Group:

As server virtualization is introduced to data centers, the number of hosts
in a data center can grow dramatically because each physical server, which
used to host one end-station, now can host many end-stations, or Virtual
Machines (20, 30, or hundreds of). Virtual Machines, with its flexible
add/delete and mobility features, not only makes it possible for achieving
better performance and better utilization on servers, they are also a very
important building block for Cloud Computing service to offer virtual
subnets and virtual hosts. The virtual subnets offered by Cloud Computing
service could allow clients to define their own subnets with its own IP
addresses and policies. 

This rapid growth of virtual hosts could tremendously impact to networks and
servers. One huge issue is frequent address resolution (IPv4) or neighbor
discovery (IPv6) requests from hosts. All hosts frequently send out those
requests due to their cache being aged out in minutes. With tens of
thousands of hosts (each with a distinct MAC address) in one Data Center,
the amount of address resolution packets per second is potentially more than
1,000 to 10,000/second. This rate imposes tremendous computational burden on
many hosts. 

Another big issue associated with huge number of virtual hosts in a data
center is potentially duplicated IP addresses within one VLAN which will
make traditional ARP or ND not working properly. Some load balance design
requires multiple hosts serving the same application to have the same IP
address but with different MAC addresses. Cloud Computing service could
allow users to have their own subnets with IP addresses and self defined
policies among those subnets. Some network designs need to put multiple
client subnets into one VLAN because the number of client subnets could be
in hundreds of thousands which is much more than 4095 VLANs. Under this
scenario, there could be duplicated IP addresses which are from different
client subnets ending up in one VLAN.  

The goal of this working group is to develop interoperable solutions to
solve those problems.  

The design should consider the following properties:

*        All solutions developed by ARP222 WG should not expect any behavior
changes on hosts, applications, or Virtual Machines being deployed in the
market. 

*        All solutions developed should not break DHCP. 

*        Evaluating the impact to IPv6 ND, and develop solutions accordingly
if needed. 

*        Should consider variety of solutions, including directory based,
proxy based, or cache based solutions. 

*        Include analysis of security concerns of IPv4 ARP requests from
malicious users. Evaluating potential security solutions and conclude if the
security threat can justify solutions. 

*        ARP222 assumes the direct links to individual hosts and virtual
machines are IEEE802.3 Ethernet links.  

*        Should consider scenarios of one Ethernet network being
interconnected by another network, which can be L2VPN, pure IP, Ethernet, or
others. 

*        Should consider address resolution solutions for one VLAN with
small number of duplicated IP addresses.  

 

Here are the items which should not be in the scope of the working group: 

*        Re-define DHCP behavior

*        Re-define security concern to IPv6 ND 

*        Direct links from hosts and virtual hosts are non Ethernet links 

*         

 

Goals and Milestones:

*        Charter statement

*        Problem Statements

*        Gap analysis 

*        Study of NHRP (RFC2332) & SCSP,  and their applicability to
Ethernet networks

*        Study and Analysis of MOOSE as a potential solution

*        Study and Analysis of SEATTLE as a potential solution.

 

 

Best Regards, Linda Dunbar

 

_______________________________________________
arp222 mailing list
arp222@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/arp222