[nvo3] VxLAN L2 VNI vs L3 VNI
GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com> Sat, 30 September 2017 03:34 UTC
Return-Path: <phdgang@gmail.com>
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 E3094134463 for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 20:34:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 8FQEtbWjS2LV for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 20:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22d.google.com (mail-io0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22d]) (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 4721213445C for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 20:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id d16so1285266ioj.3 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 20:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=MDUrPRrBhCbgL7tMuaA/jfsuErWKz8hWBGT9Xv3w2MY=; b=efEhIdaGEjUsMl7bHJMU82vHXj4EO6N/V7SzOd+MFiBn+ysDhm+1fcxBlyyRw2PFr6 /5SuiyU3roYhbz4tlQbeymBsRuOT1DotpYbUV/vw20vMZ912Pw726rVBKQW+LHIXRDA9 OM21FLXu9j821fozGAr5VZ9yFtDkYUdRPV3oOSqmHkIdBJch8jddNUz4t7iYem+erIiu nLb7/fzZ2z70Q/adNNh+Il+alrMA7n0ix5UKztl0pRUEZsAHLeLSuwv7XT2KPAwOtT65 PBYCq84BSgCLL4LZfqj6+oHdpWgPmTHWmHBR1DuO/yzNKSP6pZkz+BawDAquh96R2Mo2 gQCw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=MDUrPRrBhCbgL7tMuaA/jfsuErWKz8hWBGT9Xv3w2MY=; b=qH2Sefno4FV393peLXVcReNausE9IJWowqh98/jrQ4aY7P4w4h7+Ik5753jeHWHI1H CEkjWAoR6sfs/VvTw3WcMOb4ZbBjIGamMBFR/jkbqTzIaj5cgHbSq5/9gopOFCwS3rYZ 5tpkjpIDQAmrTC/HhdAYDO5RmBNSSW/SrfC+SKIrK4YliP7N5nYENaxIEXVO9k4B/Kvf ZC2sAkS4RRIWCi0PxrQbjD9yFjsebD0/52maQuSuG26ckAzHbHI00HNXE/mirl+XwhQ/ E77fkZVPiyWfG8PBVTUjjVEwSoLdrnjWwlfIoWfSKEGAXCutSarkNFcG7BZHinXhzNr1 5PDg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaWKg2BXSLJyh26gJG86V3XXx6qMH2quO+aLcJHr0zTQOtF3uY82 1XCJrGBzguaTVJnNYsI9UdWsjpcxZD0H8fpr9lc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCeVX9zsY5d0r7KzwIDW+uoMsu3HClzhcIkw3eaq5ZHpEpMxb5itb2/5Fi8CWCE/xx63sqWXK4ysI8KxZBquwA=
X-Received: by 10.107.88.17 with SMTP id m17mr15020415iob.101.1506742438445; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 20:33:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.36.182.4 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 20:33:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 11:33:57 +0800
Message-ID: <CAM+vMETptSOK6t0mLMOcj-XU8FF_uPb8MN-nFWbQT-Sj2Lgkcw@mail.gmail.com>
To: nvo3@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nvo3/FakOg7Phpi9AF9cstCWV4ZGog4U>
Subject: [nvo3] VxLAN L2 VNI vs L3 VNI
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, 30 Sep 2017 03:34:01 -0000
Hello group,
Just intend to figure out the relation between L2 VNI and L3 VNI.
Considering the following simple scenario, a tenant has subnet1 and subnet2.
Those subnets use L2 VNI 2000 and L2 VNI 3000 respectively.
The distributed L3 NVEs are used to connect two subnets.
Since L3 VNI is another VxLAN segment, L3 NVE use different VNI with L2 VNI,
I’m wondering to know what’s the issue if the L3 VNI is identical with L2 VNI.
For example, L3 NVE takes 2000 as L3 VNI in this case.
L3 VNE is router-capable. It will separate two broadcast domains natively.
It seems no impacts. Is there anything I miss?
+————+ +————+
| L3 NVE |=====L3 VNI=======| L3 NVE |
+————+ +————+
|| ||
L2 VNI: 2000 L2 VNI: 3000
|| ||
+————+ +————+
| Subnet1 | | Subnet2 |
+————-+ +————-+
BRs
Gang
- Re: [nvo3] VxLAN L2 VNI vs L3 VNI Shahram Davari
- Re: [nvo3] VxLAN L2 VNI vs L3 VNI Reith, Lothar
- [nvo3] VxLAN L2 VNI vs L3 VNI GangChen
- Re: [nvo3] VxLAN L2 VNI vs L3 VNI GangChen