Re: [scale] Third (and final?) call to discuss scaling VPNs

"Shah, Himanshu" <hshah@ciena.com> Tue, 07 January 2014 15:14 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=0084db7cfc=hshah@ciena.com>
X-Original-To: scale@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: scale@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF3D1ADF2E for <scale@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 07:14:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.267
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.267 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 QkeIu9pzHefg for <scale@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 07:14:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00103a01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00103a01.pphosted.com [67.231.144.234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC7971ADBD7 for <scale@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 07:14:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0000419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00103a01.pphosted.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id s07FAhkP008025; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:14:05 -0500
Received: from mdwexght02.ciena.com (LIN1-118-36-29.ciena.com [63.118.36.29]) by mx0a-00103a01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1h8kqq02jv-11 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 07 Jan 2014 10:14:04 -0500
Received: from MDWEXCHCGSIHT01.ciena.com (10.4.140.106) by MDWEXGHT02.ciena.com (10.4.140.213) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.298.1; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:14:03 -0500
Received: from ONWVEXCHHT01.ciena.com (10.128.6.16) by MDWEXCHCGSIHT01.ciena.com (10.4.140.106) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.298.1; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:14:03 -0500
Received: from ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com ([::1]) by ONWVEXCHHT01.ciena.com ([::1]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:14:02 -0500
From: "Shah, Himanshu" <hshah@ciena.com>
To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, "scale@ietf.org" <scale@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:14:01 -0500
Thread-Topic: [scale] Third (and final?) call to discuss scaling VPNs
Thread-Index: Ac8LlXo7rmQfRaqqT/KfoIgUYVLR3QAIx42Q
Message-ID: <40746B2300A8FC4AB04EE722A593182B6BFC7592@ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com>
References: <00d101cf0b95$aa505de0$fef119a0$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <00d101cf0b95$aa505de0$fef119a0$@olddog.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-10.0.0.1412-7.000.1014-20416.000
X-TM-AS-Result: No--34.614200-0.000000-31
X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes
X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.11.87, 1.0.14, 0.0.0000 definitions=2014-01-07_05:2014-01-07, 2014-01-07, 1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1305240000 definitions=main-1401070082
Subject: Re: [scale] Third (and final?) call to discuss scaling VPNs
X-BeenThere: scale@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: MPLS VPN Scaling <scale.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/scale>, <mailto:scale-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/scale/>
List-Post: <mailto:scale@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:scale-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scale>, <mailto:scale-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 15:14:16 -0000

Hi Adrian -

Silence is deafening, possibly holidays and diversion to next glittering (SDN) object.. :-)

I am interested in scaling and performance requirements of VPNs in data centers as well as carrier networks.
>From vendors (mine) perspective, we need to understand what the realistic expectations are.

Like you, I wish as well, that some of the operators participate in this discussion so that f2f meeting in London could be more productive.

Thanks,
himanshu


-----Original Message-----
From: scale [mailto:scale-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 5:46 AM
To: scale@ietf.org
Subject: [scale] Third (and final?) call to discuss scaling VPNs

My previous two emails may have been lost in the vacations.

It is now a working week for most people, so let's have one more attempt to see whether there is interest in this topic.

Thanks,
Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: scale [mailto:scale-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> Sent: 03 January 2014 22:21
> To: scale@ietf.org
> Subject: [scale] Scaling VPNs in the New Year
> 
> Sending this again in the hope of catching some people at their desks 
> at the start of January.
> 
> Adrian
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: scale [mailto:scale-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian 
> > Farrel
> > Sent: 25 December 2013 21:42
> > To: scale@ietf.org
> > Subject: [scale] Scaling VPNs at Christmas
> >
> > Hello Scale Mailing List,
> >
> > I'm a bit puzzled by the lack of activity on this list. If there is 
> > genuine support for the idea of a BoF to discuss scaling VPNs 
> > (issues, requirements, moving towards solutions) I would have expected to see more traffic.
> Certainly,
> > if there is no more evidence of enthusiasm to discuss this then I 
> > don't
think
> we
> > will go ahead with a face-to-face meeting (i.e. a BoF) at the London IETF.
> >
> > I had expected to hear a chorus of complaints from operators about 
> > how they struggle with their deployments today, and how they want to grow them soon.
> I
> > thought I was going to hear from a number of operators about the VPN 
> > requirements of data centers. And I had expected a number of vendors 
> > to be wanting to talk about how they address these problems. My 
> > expectation had been that we would talk about different scaling 
> > challenges across the VPN space
and
> > learn what techniques could be common.
> >
> > But it is OK!
> > If no-one has scaling concerns or if no-one wants to talk about them 
> > right
> now,
> > we can move on.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Adrian
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> scale mailing list
> scale@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scale

_______________________________________________
scale mailing list
scale@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scale