Re: [nvo3] DRAFT Charter Update for Discussion

Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu> Fri, 22 August 2014 00:08 UTC

Return-Path: <ghanwani@gmail.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 E5CFD1A06C5 for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:08:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 1gnTwiGxvPbY for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:08:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22f.google.com (mail-wg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1FE51A02E0 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id b13so9876272wgh.30 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=B00DG5otx3O54gFXTV5K3peJVI9n8/hdsSH3oOnu3Kc=; b=Hcaul79qegfsGABv/im2XBfJHCUu5gupiIbUr2ZG3vTcTOssALdlwe/s43ieGa8rhe 6qZn2LS9x/uEUvoi4BM6Yq68Q0emB5vZDqZWkHH0eNbanxHHWjrHQWjUCREFrKaq9a/B BvJhj4pZZIEOtd+/0Pf+2ZntKubxu08zJWcoqfyGyUGi3ICMpZXLn6eBpHpgm0OO+m5e 7wu0ckBjLh8fLhVZy23Pt6Yv8lOboQuYf9lRu0D0PTZ1F1tZh62StAFuHX/ZRwH26+1o a+2KbOSRvmO5VnqQBSPm+cgyoHbbp6umsccirgb+XyMSoPfRW3FkPYn05ljSOfa2bIeF /5/Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.23.225 with SMTP id p1mr1749442wjf.18.1408666092422; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: ghanwani@gmail.com
Received: by 10.217.148.4 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <186E2FAA-E5C5-4828-8199-4EE71B5A5C1A@queuefull.net>
References: <186E2FAA-E5C5-4828-8199-4EE71B5A5C1A@queuefull.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:08:12 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 9edKsCrtqscLMvxR7BBS42JU214
Message-ID: <CA+-tSzx5kVL6xxXEx5YnZ_G=CELK=5K1EFtaaPETDdnOvgzhhA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>
To: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b4724e20bcbd905012ca262"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nvo3/6e7ZAnXjhlzxCu5bQGifRax6rJk
Cc: "nvo3@ietf.org" <nvo3@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [nvo3] 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: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:08:16 -0000

It sounds like what is being conveyed by "centralized NVA control plane" is
that the NVO3 WG doesn't want to bother with how redundancy is achieved
for the NVA (i.e. we don't want to worry about the clustering protocol
regardless
of whether that is accomplished using BGP or something else).  If so, I
think
it would be better to state that explicitly.

Everything else needed to complete the solution is in scope --
encapsulation,
NVA-to-NVE control protocol, multicast handling, etc., and there may be
more than one solution specified for each of these.  The only other big
"if" is
whether or not we attempt to solve the inter-DC problem.  Do I have that
right?

Anoop


On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
wrote:

> 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.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> nvo3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>