IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nvo3] VRF text (take 3) in draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement-02.txt

Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net> Mon, 09 July 2012 20:27 UTC

Return-Path: <bensons@queuefull.net>
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 D336611E81B8 for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 13:27:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yGp37yCq5o-b for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 13:27:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478BA11E8171 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 13:27:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so20346970pbc.31 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=GxIJkbba93syYZXTesZWk8Xo535ZXnNU3fHv3G1rOdM=; b=FRs8vIHHcT3WogDOqF0bW7ArSo5zt9LfXAxoFsro8K8eMA62wR8cbyYGk4De2Uj4Pq sB6AfO9S7JG5ixQipiXLOKHOWTH3YGOA/ORIV/ttmbAFZkvCewoBDMGX5fLvyg3mKrRM ae0jDhWSUm2Lqo9DfF3Y5q3nD9IO063uujHy9jDcBy3xPVo7faC3x9iqOtH7KC0igGD5 4VkXsSN7STx3J0WQYFTXfUsIVohFJ3Cw/Ki3e1x9iMEtdgWVaRJQDPXrdiAvUJ5AmcFv UvXt6kQTeMib+t4Fqrzg/BJJ69ecrM1k46h67+9D1gCYPWODP95escXqZBmpcLxvcySw 803g==
Received: by 10.68.239.103 with SMTP id vr7mr52604090pbc.0.1341865703990; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bensons-sslvpn-nc.jnpr.net (natint3.juniper.net. [66.129.224.36]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hw6sm28312611pbc.73.2012.07.09.13.28.19 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4FFB3EE2.50506@queuefull.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 15:28:18 -0500
From: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: david.black@emc.com
References: <3657FA59-508C-4B18-88E8-00109F56A61E@cisco.com> <F5EF891E30B2AE46ACA20EB848689C21253A31E7A1@USNAVSXCHMBSA3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> <201207031344.q63DiUa3007677@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <0DB8F45437AB844CBB5102F807A0AD93011CFF@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com> <CAOZewqbrrfRMYRjZNd5pSvGByq7idQkjrXecYaFbJT9g_CSdQA@mail.gmail.com> <0DB8F45437AB844CBB5102F807A0AD93015FFC@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com> <201207052022.q65KMuaJ007400@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <0DB8F45437AB844CBB5102F807A0AD93018A36@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com> <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE71208D3AE8F@MX15A.corp.emc.com> <0DB8F45437AB844CBB5102F807A0AD93018C1C@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com> <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE71208D3AEA5@MX15A.corp.emc.com>
In-Reply-To: <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE71208D3AEA5@MX15A.corp.emc.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040306070204060009050000"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnIXpsPGpp4dZmWO+zIuyWKn6mFiNobqJEORJkmkmVD0FemrJGWxcRzO3l6p4qt5QVLDwYR
Cc: lufang@cisco.com, nvo3@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nvo3] VRF text (take 3) in draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement-02.txt
X-BeenThere: nvo3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "L2 \"Network Virtualization Over L3\" overlay discussion list \(nvo3\)" <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: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 20:27:59 -0000

On 2012-07-06 8:35 AM, david.black@emc.com wrote:
> Luyuan,
>
>> - "virtual routers" <> multiple VRFs on a router ... Could you
>> help us with the IETF reference if you think your "virtual router"
>> definition is correct?
> Sure, "virtual router" is the correct term, a "virtual router" is definitely
> not a VRF for a BGP/MPLS VPN and the term "virtual router" has been in use in
> the IETF for well over a decade.
>
> The two paragraphs in question were always intended to refer to the concept
> of a "virtual router" as that term is used with VRRP, see RFC 5798, and the
> use of "virtual router" dates back to at least the first version of VRRP,
> RFC 2338 (1998).  In 20/20 hindsight, the use of the VRF acronym in those
> two paragraphs was a mistake that we are now correcting - that mistake is
> at the root of this confusion (mea culpa, as I'm a co-author of that original
> text).  Do we need to cite RFC 5798 to make this clearer?

FYI, per http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4110#section-1.5 a Virtual Router 
is defined as:

    Virtual Router (VR): An instance of one of a number of logical
    routers located within a single physical router.  Each logical router
    emulates a physical router using existing mechanisms and tools for
    configuration, operation, accounting, and maintenance.

For more context, one might also wish to read 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l3vpn-as-vr-02 and some of its 
references.

Cheers,
-Benson

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email