Re: [nvo3] Fwd: DRAFT Charter Update for Discussion

"Ken Gray (kegray)" <kegray@cisco.com> Thu, 14 August 2014 21:03 UTC

Return-Path: <kegray@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2D671A05C0 for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 14:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.168
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.168 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 56ZNRTTZyl6D for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 14:03:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D88C61A0302 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 14:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9129; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1408050234; x=1409259834; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=CrkGDompr1RwpRZhz9QXvfy1l3VkWCG/Yk9PsBKmnDs=; b=A7ZIuF40LMF6KjWBxaMm4HgveWZpxY0a6jCbqtLTteS7MOGEcc3szn88 KK+bbx3LQYIdK8/gDNxHJ5ZqTZs+toSVjIPRdwOu+Mim8bHtzd1y9Mwfm tsQUhd1Yep1mu/MOcq/w8GEsJuCdk26lcg/k3fBnG/TL4dtahUHJW4ntg g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AioFAF0j7VOtJV2a/2dsb2JhbABZgkcjI1NXBMwMgWWHRwGBGBZ3hAMBAQEEgQkCAQgRAQIBAigHMhQDBggCBAESGQKIJwEMxTMXiX+FPBcBBoRGBYYQiw2EJoZ2lH6DXGwBAYFGgQcBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,865,1400025600"; d="scan'208,217";a="347634467"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Aug 2014 21:03:53 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com [173.37.183.84]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7EL3q2p005158 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 14 Aug 2014 21:03:52 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([fe80::8c1c:7b85:56de:ffd1]) by xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([173.37.183.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 16:03:52 -0500
From: "Ken Gray (kegray)" <kegray@cisco.com>
To: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>, "nvo3@ietf.org" <nvo3@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [nvo3] Fwd: DRAFT Charter Update for Discussion
Thread-Index: AQHPty6jY9CXNLM5RUyGSW/fdmtXCZvQqNyA
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 21:03:52 +0000
Message-ID: <D01299A9.3D547%kegray@cisco.com>
References: <186E2FAA-E5C5-4828-8199-4EE71B5A5C1A@queuefull.net> <CAP4=VcgV0RtgqAw3kwQPrU92Pqn2K=0hzg1+MCMH=XdKqNiU_w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP4=VcgV0RtgqAw3kwQPrU92Pqn2K=0hzg1+MCMH=XdKqNiU_w@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.21.95.91]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D01299A93D547kegrayciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nvo3/1TS0vptDpzeTnGLdgbaxra4aZpo
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Fwd: DRAFT Charter Update for Discussion
X-BeenThere: nvo3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Network Virtualization Overlays \(NVO3\) Working Group" <nvo3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nvo3>, <mailto:nvo3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nvo3/>
List-Post: <mailto:nvo3@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nvo3-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3>, <mailto:nvo3-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 21:03:59 -0000

It may be a bit pedantic (but probably no more so than the argument that had it briefly so named), I think "also known as a Data Center Virtual Private Network (DCVPN)" is unnecessary.  Otherwise, for accuracy, I'd suggest "known for less than a week as" or "fleetingly referred to as".   And that's my real point, nobody is really lost over that moniker.  It had a short and useless life.


From: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net<mailto:bensons@queuefull.net>>
Date: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 3:41 PM
To: "nvo3@ietf.org<mailto:nvo3@ietf.org>" <nvo3@ietf.org<mailto:nvo3@ietf.org>>
Subject: [nvo3] Fwd: DRAFT Charter Update for Discussion

Just a reminder that Matthew and I are looking for feedback on the draft text of a new NVO3 charter. Can it be that we wrote a charter so perfect there are no comments..?

The draft charter text is quoted in my email below. For reference it can also be found at http://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/nvo3/charter-ietf-nvo3-01-rev-20140808.txt

Cheers,
-Benson & Matthew


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net<mailto:bensons@queuefull.net>>
Date: Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 4:53 PM
Subject: DRAFT Charter Update for Discussion
To: nvo3@ietf.org<mailto:nvo3@ietf.org>


Dear NVO3 Contributors -

As discussed during the NVO3 meeting at IETF-90 in Toronto, the chairs have been drafting a new / revised charter for the WG. The latest draft charter text is below for your review.

Frankly, we suspect that some of the wording could be further improved to be more clear and/or precise. With that in mind we ask for your help - please let us know if something seems unclear or if you have suggestions for better wording.

If you have feedback please post it to the list for discussion within the next 2 weeks.

Thanks,
-Benson & Matthew

An NVO3 solution, also known as a Data Center Virtual Private Network (DCVPN),
is a set of protocols and/or protocol extensions that address the issues
described by draft-ietf-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement consistent with the
approach described by draft-ietf-nvo3-framework.

NVO3 will document DCVPN requirements for both control plane protocol(s) and
data plane encapsulation format(s), as well as management, operational,
maintenance, troubleshooting, security and OAM protocol requirements.
Additionally, NVO3 will document common use-cases for DCVPN solutions.

Consistent with the documents described above, the NVO3 WG will document an
architecture for DCVPNs within a data center environment based on the following
architectural design points:
-   A logically centralized NVA control plane
-   Support for an underlay IP data plane between NVEs

Based on this architecture the NVO3 WG will develop one or more NVO3 solutions.
This may include documenting applicability of existing protocols, contributing
to the development of protocol extensions by other WGs and/or SDOs, and/or
developing new protocols as appropriate.

Solutions and/or protocols that were developed outside of the IETF, but not
developed by another SDO, and that have multiple interoperable implementations
may be adopted by the NVO3 WG for further development, based on WG consensus,
if requested by the authors .

If the NVO3 WG anticipates the adoption of the technologies of another SDO,
such as the IEEE, as part of any DCVPN solution, it will liaise with that SDO
to ensure the compatibility of the approach.