Re: [bess] BFD WGLC for draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan; BESS input solicited

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Wed, 19 December 2018 14:28 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB7512867A; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 06:28:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 A44F_7Yc25l9; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 06:28:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com (mail-lf1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 723EB1200B3; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 06:28:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id y11so15195311lfj.4; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 06:28:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0lE75dZWH+1tCRnLDQ5Qt/HpsRIfOI6tXfR5RVwjNBk=; b=pZZY1rZm6qVkg22D0zim5KaOXyKI9Xyq9oxz2V6z9xkRa9HGjMbYPIPhllNu8GShKk DIfaF37j0Fx2lTHtt7rNrB5bC0KqWdsz3vGLb9ThtSfzDcA+lNQJK2OiqtAww1yDHpRo 4j/FT0F3ZqxF0OJhbae6GlqYr1lRzVR3SJVAbtj/uVgZ04AwH4UNVlxf4Irl1q2CYi/F qPXHQDJcZ82IszAC6FDMSNvFNwMn+vNwzlDw8CUPpkQMlcdpSgykvuF9Ca/oFFd+2ws3 HtK//AQir4bFdLSQEYNRB9vq4QtXPauhdeRIH1FL/707buHJ8czPv/2uKx9lvy5mhx7C e2iQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0lE75dZWH+1tCRnLDQ5Qt/HpsRIfOI6tXfR5RVwjNBk=; b=YpXBv3sIGGhh+gqKke6dTYB8SjlfOfy1AsGPVLmb9KWsd+ezMy5LRbfZAfUM0+SlvH XcR50/Yifbobhq11OTv4c2f3Oa8WaVsrMFmgBNeNcNbhpxxEwBsgUFf2dDUNZIR7VDWt HsSphhnuz+5C7VsZ+FTSvNCYcDhyM6wlPLGohlg/1s3HSKDXjwg9VlEsGZGX2UGqvFnX ypT2Cggh9/MVXWQjStg4MNmCunLs2vVWhv8Ly2jl+Qr93Y/eOpZYJ5u/hM0AOZ4Bn9IO cBKVRUHt/j0gjhrjPsQziMfU4oef+qZEdVNfqN4Ce5wCWxqTcITXaRcwztYdBft+SsmB WghA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWY4HwXrsypggEA1+DgBGdZE5LpvakRu0oscrRZVaRm44rUrbdPl oPuvtD07E4kJTGpE3xRkEsebEQ6ykYitIRDQOtI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/VxmmdLr8uTejKOBkIWZ0gpBA3pM3gB9kI6+ATIazI9xzPfsbgPDMXlmLwED7Sxh6ZmjN2B+Tt7CL294swxd30=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:c650:: with SMTP id w77mr13202198lff.56.1545229732438; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 06:28:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20181212140145.GA22828@pfrc.org> <CA+-tSzzLZ2e_JA3Z3-iP4btjzLd0gmUwmBUh-ae7p1Kc+0c3gg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+RyBmUw7cm70CwQDiGDijvQ8GZUMt1a0Q_j1WvRXNfJUtUopQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+-tSzy+A9414GXeCYNvsDwS4j85mLum0ObKU6o3gMASHtSNDg@mail.gmail.com> <B5C4CB21-0BD1-4A05-ACC2-D4F45ACBCD03@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B5C4CB21-0BD1-4A05-ACC2-D4F45ACBCD03@cisco.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 06:28:40 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmVboORC3VtU_hTS9QO4Am4Xskdtdofn_+HpdFjNNTKRFQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>
Cc: Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>, rtg-bfd WG <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, BESS <bess@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004c656e057d60d51a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/CCMxFh8zCLeD1trNAoFLij47wXY>
Subject: Re: [bess] BFD WGLC for draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan; BESS input solicited
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 14:28:59 -0000

Hi Anoop,
thank you for the great text you've contributed. Accepted. I'll update the
working text and publish later today.

Kind regards,
Greg

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 5:19 AM Reshad Rahman (rrahman) <rrahman@cisco.com>
wrote:

> +1 to Anoop's comments. I've made similar comment to Greg privately, and
> Anoop's proposed text clears things up.
>
> Regards,
> Reshad (no hat).
>
> On 2018-12-19, 1:54 AM, "Rtg-bfd on behalf of Anoop Ghanwani" <
> rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of anoop@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:
>
>     Hi Greg,
>
>     Yes this captures what I was trying to get added.
>
>     Perhaps the last sentence can be changed to:
>
>     "This document is written assuming the use of VXLAN for virtualized
>     hosts and refers to VMs and VTEPs in hypervisors.  However, the
>     concepts are equally applicable to non-virtualized hosts attached to
>     VTEPs in switches."
>
>     Thanks,
>     Anoop
>
>     On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:17 PM Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>     >
>     > Hi Anoop,
>     > thank you for your comments and the suggested text. To clarify the
> extent of the update, would the following accurately reflect the change in
> Introduction you're proposing:
>     > OLD TEXT:
>     >    VXLAN is typically deployed in data centers interconnecting
>     >    virtualized hosts of a tenant.  VXLAN addresses requirements of
> the
>     >    Layer 2 and Layer 3 data center network infrastructure in the
>     >    presence of VMs in a multi-tenant environment, discussed in
> section 3
>     >    [RFC7348], by providing Layer 2 overlay scheme on a Layer 3
> network.
>     > NEW TEXT:
>     >   One use of VXLAN is in data centers interconnecting
>     >   VMs of a tenant.  VXLAN addresses requirements of the
>     >    Layer 2 and Layer 3 data center network infrastructure in the
>     >    presence of VMs in a multi-tenant environment, discussed in
> section 3
>     >    of [RFC7348], by providing Layer 2 overlay scheme on a Layer 3
> network.
>     >    Another use is as an encapsulation for EVPN [RFC 8365].
>     >
>     >   In the remainder of this document the terms VM and End Station
>     >   are used interchangeably.
>     >
>     > If my understanding of the proposed update is correct, I'd be glad
> to use it (adding RFC 8365 as Informational reference).  Should note that
> in the draft we never used "End Station". Perhaps the last sentence is not
> required.
>     >
>     > What do you think?
>     >
>     > Regards,
>     > Greg
>     >
>     > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:08 AM Anoop Ghanwani <
> anoop@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> I would change the introduction to the following to mention the use
> of
>     >> VXLAN by BGP EVPN.
>     >>
>     >> Thanks,
>     >> Anoop
>     >>
>     >> ==
>     >>
>     >>    "Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network" (VXLAN) [RFC7348]
> provides
>     >>    an encapsulation scheme that allows building an overlay network
> by
>     >>    decoupling the address space of the attached virtual hosts from
> that
>     >>    of the network.
>     >>
>     >>   One use of VXLAN is in data centers interconnecting
>     >>   VMs of a tenant.  VXLAN addresses requirements of the
>     >>    Layer 2 and Layer 3 data center network infrastructure in the
>     >>    presence of VMs in a multi-tenant environment, discussed in
> section 3
>     >>    of [RFC7348], by providing Layer 2 overlay scheme on a Layer 3
> network.
>     >>    Another use is as an encapsulation for EVPN [RFC 8365].
>     >>
>     >>   In the remainder of this document the terms VM and End Station
>     >>   are used interchangeably.
>     >>
>     >>    In the absence of a router in the overlay, a VM can communicate
> with
>     >>    another VM only if they are on the same VXLAN segment.  VMs are
>     >>    unaware of VXLAN tunnels as a VXLAN tunnel is terminated on a
> VXLAN
>     >>    Tunnel End Point (VTEP) (hypervisor/TOR).  VTEPs
> (hypervisor/TOR) are
>     >>    responsible for encapsulating and decapsulating frames exchanged
>     >>    among VMs.
>     >>
>     >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 6:02 AM Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
> wrote:
>     >> >
>     >> > BESS Working Group members,
>     >> >
>     >> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-04
>     >> >
>     >> > BFD has finished working group last call on BFD for Vxlan and is
> about ready
>     >> > to request publication as an RFC.  A last minute comment
> suggested that we
>     >> > should consider inviting comment from your working group for
> expertise.
>     >> >
>     >> > We will be leaving the last call open until December 21 to leave
> time for
>     >> > final comments.
>     >> >
>     >> > -- Jeff (for BFD)
>     >> >
>     >> > _______________________________________________
>     >> > BESS mailing list
>     >> > BESS@ietf.org
>     >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>     >>
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> BESS mailing list
>     >> BESS@ietf.org
>     >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>
>
>