Re: [rrg] Next topic?

["Michael K. Smith - Adhost" <[e-mail]>]

On 5/12/11 6:29 PM, "Xu Xiaohu" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hi Tony and all,
>
>In the past few years, RRG has done a lot of excellent research work to
>explore various ideas and approaches (e.g., map&encap, id/locator split
>and
>translation...) to addressing the Internet routing scalability issue.
>Today
>it seems that the cloud Data Center Network (DCN) and Data Center
>Interconnection (DCI) scenarios are facing a similar scalability challenge
>(i.e., MAC forwarding table scalability issue). The demand for VM mobility
>within the whole large L2 data center network or even across
>geographically
>dispersed data centers is one major driving force of extending the L2
>domain
>scope larger and larger.
>
>Although the reason for the MAC forwarding table scalability issue in the
>DCN/DCI scenarios is not the same as that for the Internet routing
>scalability issue, the ideas and approaches suitable for scaling the
>Internet routing system could be utilized to deal with the MAC forwarding
>table scalability issue. There are already many such attempts in reality,
>especially in the academic circle. VL2 , SEATTLE and MOOSE are good
>examples
>of them.
>
>Hence I suggest we spend some time to consider whether we could utilize
>our
>experience which was obtained from the past and ongoing Internet routing
>scalability solution research to address the similar scalability issue
>existed in the DCN/DCI scenarios, for example, we could attempt or even
>develop those familiar ideas or approaches mentioned above to address the
>MAC table scalability issue in the DCN/DCI scenarios.
>
>Best regards,
>Xiaohu

As an adjunct to this line, there is the ARMD group in the IETF (not
officially chartered AFAIK) and an associated BOF at NANOG 52 in Denver.

Mike