IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nvo3] Number assignments

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Sat, 22 July 2017 14:33 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DA44131B2D for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 07:33:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 h5QA-T4H2OxH for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 07:33:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) (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 18B31120227 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 07:33:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.189] (cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com [172.250.240.132]) (authenticated bits=0) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v6MEWt8r010929 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 22 Jul 2017 07:32:56 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>, nvo3@ietf.org
References: <87fudpjjxh.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <2f88c68c-f3d9-ae14-ff30-236ec29043bd@isi.edu>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 07:32:55 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87fudpjjxh.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nvo3/2YtaCNYeD-dtTLcDevzRJND59NI>
Subject: Re: [nvo3] Number assignments
X-BeenThere: nvo3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 14:33:38 -0000

Dale,


On 7/21/2017 7:15 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> When layer 4 is used over Geneve, things are more complicated, because
> there's no defined way of representing an IP protocol/next header value
> directly as an Ethertype, and few or no protocols that can be
> represented as such a value have assigned Ethertypes.
That is a good thing, IMO.

> It seems to me that it would be useful to embed the IP protocol/next
> header value space into the Ethertype space by allocating a block of 256
> Ethertypes, xx00 to xxFF, to IANA, to represent the protocol/next header
> values.  This is a large allocation, but the Ethertype space is thinly
> allocated and ony 60 or so of the possible first-byte values are used,
> leaving over 150 choices to allocate.
I disagree. As with most codepoints, if you want ONE (e.g., for Geneve
as the next protocol after ethernet) then maybe. If you want more, then
IMO absolutely not.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email