Re: [nvo3] Second Working Group Last call for draft-ietf-nvo3-encap

Dear Authors

I have read the latest draft and support publication.

This is a very important document for operators to help provide guidance on
NVO3 directional encapsulation and what will be the eventual end all be all
encapsulation which from the draft it sounds like GENEVE is out in front.

Few comments.

The draft mentions GUE but does not expand what GUE stands for.

As RFC 7348 VXLAN is the most widely of all deployments worldwide I am
wondering why it is not listed in the NVO3 encapsulation types.

Also RFC 7637 NVGRE as well has implementations by vendors and deployments
by operators I wonder why that was excluded in the list of NVO3
encapsulations examined.

The goal of NVO3 charter is to have a single encapsulation type and GENEVE
based on section 7 is the starting point for a proposed standard for NVO3
encapsulation.

So let’s say NVO3 ends up being the chosen end all be all standard
encapsulation type, what would vendors as well as operators do with
existing VXLAN and NVGRE deployments and would those deployments eventually
require software or I am guessing hardware upgrades to support GENEVE.

It seems that out of the three encapsulation types in the draft, GENEVE was
chosen as it builds on existing VXLAN framework with some added
extensibility so not too difficult for operators migration in theory from
VXLAN to GENEVE.

Kind Regards

Gyan

On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 11:51 PM <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn> wrote:

> Hi Matthew and Sam,
>
> I've read the latest version of this draft.
> I think this document is valuable and ready for publication.
>
> Best Regards,
> Xiao Min
>
> ------------------原始邮件------------------
> 发件人：Bocci,Matthew(Nokia-GB)
> 收件人：NVO3;
> 抄送人：draft-ietf-nvo3-encap@ietf.org;
> 日 期 ：2021年07月01日 23:09
> 主 题 ：[nvo3] Second Working Group Last call for draft-ietf-nvo3-encap
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> nvo3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>
> This email begins a two-week working group last call for
> draft-ietf-nvo3-encap-06.
> Please review the draft and post any comments to the NVO3 working group
> list. If you have read the latest version of the draft but have no comments
> and believe it is ready for publication  as an informational RFC, please
> also indicate so to the WG email list.
> We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to
> this document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with
> IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669  and 5378 for more details).
> If you are listed as an Author or a Contributor of this document, please
> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
> relevant undisclosed IPR. The Document  won't progress without answers from
> all the Authors and Contributors.
> Currently there are no IPR disclosures against this document.
> If you are not listed as an Author or a Contributor, then please
> explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been
> disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
> As a reminder, we are pursuing publication of this document in order to
> permanently document the experience of one working group in choosing
> between multiple proposed standards track  encapsulation drafts. The idea
> was that this would provide helpful guidance to others in the community
> going forward.
> This poll will run until Thursday 15th July 2021.
> Regards
> Matthew and Sam_______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> nvo3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>
-- 

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com <gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com>*

*M 301 502-1347*