Re: [nvo3] I-D Action: draft-xia-nvo3-vxlan-qosmarking-01.txt

[Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>]

 Hi Dino,

Regarding your comment on copying IP header QoS bits into VXLAN header,

note that IP packet is coming from the VMs.

Yes for dynamic marking these bits can be copied.
However, VMs may not be configured to mark these fields.

For static marking these bits can not be used because VMs are not
aware of the VNI. So NVE has to do the static marking.

Hope this clarifies.

Regards,

Behcet

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Brian E Carpenter
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> [resend with corrected address, sorry]
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>>  The first three bits (bits 5-7) are precedence bits. They are
>>>  assigned according to [RFC0791]. Precedence values '110' and '111'
>>>  are selected for routing traffic.
>>>
>>>  The last three bits (bits 8-10) are class selector bits. Thet are
>>>  assigned as follows:
>>>
>>> 001 - BK or background traffic
>> ...
>>> As can be seen the markings are the same as in IEEE 802.1p...
>>
>> This is not in any way compatible with RFC 2474, which also made the
>> relevant part of RFC 791 obsolete.
>>
>> If you want to be compatible with RFC 2474 you should not specify the
>> bits at all - just say that they are exactly as defined in RFC 2474
>> and the various PHB definitions that have been published.
>
> I think that diffserv is less relevant in the context of VXLAN.
>
>>  If you
>> want to be compatible with IEEE 802.1p that is a different matter,
>
> Yes this is more relevant for VXLAN.
>
>> but you cannot mix the two up in this way.
>
> I now understand that we confused the two very different things.
>
> Regards,
>
> Behcet
>>
>>     Brian
>>
>>
>>