IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rtg-dt-encap-considerations] overlay encapsulation group

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 23 April 2015 23:25 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FB1F1AD065 for <rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 16:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -111.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-111.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HTML_ATTACH=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 OM9H0Gq5KZe8 for <rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 16:25:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A93BC1AD05F for <Rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 16:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=132794; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1429831529; x=1431041129; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=UaF+K4jjTiFRXNqn6uI5Rtkq5oGMmHGQrRcBXIGkGS8=; b=FmctZqli/6Ax5dMmqCa2305cvDnfJCtGfR7dI547VfVZIUT/NFsjfECX 2RyeS9khW/WE6a77+HBbu0LUFrFxfAhzjOy3kVy6VtdD+KXV0i9b80Of/ 4LWP5Yd2Agt0wTxFMROWj7lppxHScl6aXpYRsjyea1myJdj0bkKH70FUC I=;
X-Files: draft-baker-openstack-ipv6-model-03.html, signature.asc : 122770, 487
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0B/BgCzfjlV/4cNJK1RAQMGgkVHUlwFug2LaYIIhXYKAoExTAEBAQEBAYELhCABAQEDARoBSgIFAQUEAwULAgEIEgYWAQkBDTIXDgIEDgMCDgYHiAgIDcxPAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBF4s3hBYBAQkGAQQGAQIEAgYxCAUFBxIBgwSBFgWBTINcgRQ2iCeCMYFygTcFU1qBZYFjDIIGgSIRK4MJghdZYIVxg1WDTiOBZR0CAxyBUUItAQEBAX4BAQUCFwQCHIEAAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,635,1422921600"; d="asc'?html'217?scan'217,208,217";a="414695504"
Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Apr 2015 23:25:23 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com [173.37.183.86]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t3NNPLN1009821 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:25:21 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.172]) by xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com ([173.37.183.86]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 18:25:20 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Thread-Topic: [Rtg-dt-encap-considerations] overlay encapsulation group
Thread-Index: AQHQfhb3LdlB0LShckKzJvuC1/xh3J1bkSYA
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:25:19 +0000
Message-ID: <4C1681E5-DCE4-4CB2-B90C-C626EFD96D3F@cisco.com>
References: <CALx6S34H3rebaH3XbQD839Cdj7EB3L3T7iWErEmxETO2Ly+L6Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S34H3rebaH3XbQD839Cdj7EB3L3T7iWErEmxETO2Ly+L6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.121]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E7ECDD1B-950D-49A0-B85B-3AE86639D678"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dt-encap-considerations/5VkMoDGM6RPGM-o0If1BrzQKpts>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 16:35:21 -0700
Cc: "Rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org" <Rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Rtg-dt-encap-considerations] overlay encapsulation group
X-BeenThere: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Design Team on Encapsulation Considerations discussion list <rtg-dt-encap-considerations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dt-encap-considerations>, <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtg-dt-encap-considerations/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dt-encap-considerations>, <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:25:49 -0000

> On Apr 23, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Fred,
> 
> Sorry this is a little late, but I wanted to respond to this thread.
> Please look at Identifier Locator Addressing
> (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-herbert-nvo3-ila-00). This is along
> the lines of using IPv6 without encapsulation for network
> virtualization (similar to your idea to use flow label in IPv6 for
> tenant ID). In ILA we encode tenant IDs the their address into IPv6
> use Identifier/Locator split (borrowing concept from ILNP).
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom



Take a look at the attached. Anything like that?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email