Request WG adopt polling//RE: About the WG adoption of draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet-fib-reduction-00
Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com> Tue, 05 August 2014 02:46 UTC
Return-Path: <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 916CC1ABB2F for <l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 19:46:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 yw-fvWj65U0h for <l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 19:46:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB3C61ABC10 for <l3vpn@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 19:46:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BKW76489; Tue, 05 Aug 2014 02:46:30 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from nkgeml407-hub.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.38) by lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 03:46:29 +0100
Received: from NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.204]) by nkgeml407-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.38]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 10:46:22 +0800
From: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
To: "l3vpn@ietf.org" <l3vpn@ietf.org>
Subject: Request WG adopt polling//RE: About the WG adoption of draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet-fib-reduction-00
Thread-Topic: Request WG adopt polling//RE: About the WG adoption of draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet-fib-reduction-00
Thread-Index: AQHPsFdxjAlMI//4jUSmUKg45vvOzA==
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 02:46:22 +0000
Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE082A265B@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.98.134]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l3vpn/pu3Sp596MvPTSQNqDLwG8WzfFLc
X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <l3vpn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l3vpn>, <mailto:l3vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l3vpn/>
List-Post: <mailto:l3vpn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l3vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn>, <mailto:l3vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 02:46:36 -0000
Hi co-chairs, We have addressed all the comments received so far in the following revision (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet-fib-reduction-01). Major changes since the -00 version include: 1) incorporate Wim's proposal about how to install some particular remote host routes by default. 2) add a new co-author (Wim Henderickx). We co-authors believe this revision is stable enough for WG adoption. Best regards, Xiaohu (on behalf of all co-authors) > -----Original Message----- > From: Xuxiaohu > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 2:54 PM > To: l3vpn@ietf.org > Subject: About the WG adoption of > draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet-fib-reduction-00 > > Hi all, > > Virtual Subnet (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l3vpn-virtual-subnet) is > intended for building L3 network virtualization overlays within and/or across > data centers. Since a subnet is extended across multiple PE routers, CE host > routes need to be exchanged among PE routers. As a result, the forwarding table > size of PE routers (e.g., some old ToR switches) may become a big concern in > large-scale data center environments. In fact, some folks had already expressed > their concerns about this potential FIB scaling issue during the WG adoption poll > of the Virtual Subnet draft. > > As CE host routes may still need to be maintained on the control plane of PE > routers in some cases (e.g.. MVPN scenario), this draft > (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet-fib-reduction-00) > proposes a very simple mechanism for reducing the FIB size of PE routers > without any change to the RIB and even the routing table. > > During the L3VPN WG session at Toronto, many people had expressed their > supports for the WG adoption of this work (Thanks a lot for your supports). > However, there are still a few people who are not in favor of the WG adoption. > According to WG co-chairs' suggestion, I would like to request those opposers to > explain their reasons so that we could further improve the draft if possible. > > Best regards, > Xiaohu (on behalf of all co-authors)