Re: 答复: Solicit reviews and comments on draft-hao-l3vpn-inter-nvo3-vpn-00

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

> between the DC and WAN interfaces without performing an IP lookup.

What's wrong with IP lookup per VPN on ASBR ?

Are you sure you want to allocate as many VN_IDs as you have VPN
prefixes in each VPN and inject all of those into end systems in the
DC ?

Moreover do you think there are advantages to continue to churn your
Vn_IDs intra-dc advertisements at the same rate as your WAN L3VPN IP
reachability changes say between any of the two PEs for multihomed VPN
sites ?

I would consider that topology hiding is an advantage not a drawback.

Note that DC facing ASBR may demux to a VRF on VN_ID basis per VPN
(not per VPN prefix), perform again per VPN scoped IP lookup then
follow with encapsulating in correct VPN label towards WAN. Pretty
simple setup :)

Thx,
R.

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Haoweiguo <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> In inter-as option-B between NVO3 and MPLS/IP VPN network case,  the DC
> Gateway router(ASBR in NVO3 network) should perform translation between
> VN-IDs and IP VPN labels while forwarding packets between the DC and WAN
> interfaces without performing an IP lookup. This draft describes how to set
> up VN-ID and MPLS Label mapping relationship on NVO3 network gateway(ASBR).
> This is the new point of this draft, and has some difference from
> traditional RFC4364 based inter-as option-B solution.
>
> Thanks
>
> weiguo
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> 发件人: Haoweiguo
> 发送时间: 2014年7月2日 11:52
> 收件人: Robert Raszuk
> 抄送: [e-mail]
> 主题: 答复: Solicit reviews and comments on draft-hao-l3vpn-inter-nvo3-vpn-00
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> Currently there is no heterogeneous option-B inter-as solution between NVO3
> and MPLS L3VPN network, only option-A inter-as solution is provided in
> mainstream NVO3 solution. This draft mainly discribes the procedures of NVO3
> distributed gateway integrated with inter-as option-B solution, it can
> provide directions for open source or commercial implementations.
>
> Pls see my detail reply inline [weiguo].
>
> Thanks
>
> weiguo
>
> ________________________________
> 发件人: [e-mail] [[e-mail]] 代表 Robert Raszuk
> [[e-mail]]
> 发送时间: 2014年7月2日 1:21
> 收件人: Haoweiguo
> 抄送: [e-mail]
> 主题: Re: Solicit reviews and comments on draft-hao-l3vpn-inter-nvo3-vpn-00
>
> Hi Weiguo,
>
> I have read your document with interest expecting to see something new ..
> well I have not seen anything which other L3VPN documents would not have
> already covered.
>
> Section 4 lists 16 million number as issue of option A. Can you explain
> where in option A architecture such number is stated ?
> As to the number of sessions issue between ASBRs I would recommend lecture
> of draft-mapathak-interas-ab-00.txt
> [weiguo]:Because theoretically 16M VN are supported in a NVO3 network, if
> centralized layer 3 gateway and inter-as option-A solution is used, then 16M
> sub-interfaces should be supported on each ASBR. VPN traffic separation
> still relies on VLAN.
> In draft-mapathak-interas-ab-00,EBGP session can be greatly reduced, but I
> don't know how can you separate different VPN's traffic? Does it still
> relies on VLAN or sub-interface?
>
> Bottom line I am not finding anything new in this document which would not
> be already well known or even shipping in open source or commercial
> implementations.
> [weiguo]:
>
> The difference from traditional RFC 4364 inter-as option-B are as follows:
>
>
>
> Internal DC to external DC direction routing distribution procedures:
>
> ASBR1 allocates MPLS VPN Label per tenant (VN ID) per NVE, the incoming
> forwarding table on ASBR1 is as following:
>
>    +--------------------+------------------+
>
>    |  MPLS VPN Label    |  NVE  + VN ID    |
>
>    +--------------------+------------------+
>
>    |       1000         |  NVE1 + 10       |
>
>    +--------------------+------------------+
>
>    |       2000         |  NVE1 + 20       |
>
>    +--------------------+------------------+
>
>
>
>
>
> External DC to internal DC direction routing distribution procedures:
>
> ASBR1 allocates VN ID for each VPN Label receiving from ASBR2, The outgoing
> forwarding table on ASBR1 is as follows:
>
>    +------------------+--------------------+
>
>    |       VN ID      |   Out VPN Label    |
>
>    +------------------+--------------------+
>
>    |      10000       |        3000        |
>
>    +------------------+--------------------+
>
>    |      10001       |        4000        |
>
>    +------------------+--------------------+
>
>
>
> In this scenario, VN ID has local significance and is similar to MPLS Label,
> it's different from VN usage in NVO3 network, in NVO3 network VN has network
> wide globally significance.
>
>
>
> Also, NVO3 support NVE-NVA architecture, in this architecture, NVA should
> support inter-as option-B function,  the forwarding table on ASBR and NVEs
> are downloaded through NVA.
>
>
> Best regards,
> R.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 3:29 AM, Haoweiguo <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>> We submit a new draft of "Inter-AS Option B between NVO3 and BGP/MPLS IP
>> VPN network", please review it and warmly appreciate your comments and
>> suggestions.
>> Thanks
>> weiguo
>
>
>