Re: [v6ops] IPv6 Operational Guidelines for DC (draft-lopez-v6ops-dc-ipv6-04)
"Alexis Munoz \(Gmail\)" <amunoz0481@gmail.com> Wed, 19 June 2013 01:55 UTC
Return-Path: <amunoz0481@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD04811E80A5 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:55:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, 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 qsJKfbqF2uRQ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:55:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f169.google.com (mail-vc0-f169.google.com [209.85.220.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA42921F93BA for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:55:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id ia10so3463305vcb.28 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:55:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index :content-language; bh=1xUK3qcHdvqHNtZTFU4portSJ7PTdpKHpeJf50shb0E=; b=t4YtaD9ha3OGr8Cp1Mqb3+PBA/9a6+S4UxdePBTWTHl/6qTztnItyhBWEUvvPd4G5H 9rsSeRaCkpF6GkQLqJ6hinnq/aVJoH415yo/MxxXJ7VX1+FEkxITY2H1wgLsivETfJc9 SBYs7Z90KdYo8HJuW2Z5T3FKCenNaMzYV7rkS4oU6zMmX0O95UM97WB1fKVDGbPm6dRv 1p9cSQCbdk3/PwZtiHEQBhVQrQdMZYCddeE2Lt6kS5MttQzakaySLARXXuhzCXOwVOUT uEl7dnrNr6OybAt42yI0OXDloh0FESJk44q5fSAmbFNUEdxTtgfRTbTaJcOXviM+JnHS C3eA==
X-Received: by 10.58.68.38 with SMTP id s6mr252415vet.46.1371606944170; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:55:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from AMUNOZPC ([181.129.131.86]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id bk7sm7321965ved.0.2013.06.18.18.55.42 for <v6ops@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Alexis Munoz (Gmail)" <amunoz0481@gmail.com>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
References: <51C070BB.9090209@criba.edu.ar>
In-Reply-To: <51C070BB.9090209@criba.edu.ar>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:55:39 -0500
Message-ID: <017f01ce6c90$1ae2e190$50a8a4b0$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQCIoMgyEq3OaLkWA6YFxvUyr3pWP5vH3Q4g
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IPv6 Operational Guidelines for DC (draft-lopez-v6ops-dc-ipv6-04)
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:55:49 -0000
Dear Authors First of all, I would like to congratulate to all the team who is participating in addressing this guideline ahead. Excellent work. So, I have read the document and I took some notes focus more in Enterprise Datacenters that I would like to share here. I split my notes following the chapters on the document: 2.1. General Architecture The generalized interconnection schema in a DC in my opinion must goes beyond. Normally, in a datacenter infrastructure there are modules interconnecting the DC. I agree, the Internet Access is one of them, but we cannot forget that there might be also modules interconnecting the DC such as WAN and Remote Access Modules, all depend on the scenario and sector. The IPv6 Deployment in the Datacenter might extend the interconnectivity to Branch Offices, Partners, Third-Parties, so forth. The IPv6 address schema should consistent end-to-end, even more for delivery services and applications on public or private networks. 2.2. Experimental Stages One of the implicit advantages of IPv6 application are Flow Labels and Mobile IP, only if they are applied at the ingress elements. However, it is not clear for me, because all the internal networks are IPv4 in this stage, then, why Mobile IP comes into play, also, Are we talking about Mobile IP on IPv4 or IPv6?. Additionally, for VM Migration intra or inter-DC, we might prefer to use mechanism offered by vendors for moving either the virtual machines or the data, and to keep the ip address intra or inter-DC, there are mechanism as VLANs, Extended LANs, so on. I will really discuss and review the advantages and disadvantages of this stage. If somebody is interested in looking this stage for experimentation or early evaluation, the idea is to find out a good purpose for enroll it. 2.3. Dual Stack Stages On which internal elements are required to have dual-stack??, I guess that an internal part or element could be defined as Switch, Router, Load Balancer, Firewall, NIPS, Server, Network Service, Application, so forth. I think that could be interesting to mention in general in a dual-stack stage which elements are more common to have a dual-stack to achieve a soft transition and avoid impact in the performance of the services and applications. Additionally, the Dual-Stack is focus on LB Mechanism, what happen in scenarios where is not required a Load Balancer?....how is affected the data transmission in the farm servers??...Should left in IPV4 the Farm Servers and apply Dual-Stacking in the Services Layers with devices as Firewall, Load Balancer, DNS, Router, Wireless Controllers, So Forth?...what is the best practice here? 2.4 IPv6 Only Stage. I absolutely agree that planning the ip address schema is one of the most important and stronger part for a transition IPv6 into the DC Infrastructure successfully, also apply for any of the transition stages. 3. Other Operational Considerations 3.1 Addressing The document recommend at least to have a /48 for each Datacenter, what should be the recommendation to allocate the subnets inside the datacenter?, I know all depends on the services and architecture, but I think could be good idea to mention some general good practices to allocate properly the IPv6 into the DC Infrastructure. 3.3. Monitoring and Logging Collect data specific can be using SNMPv3 over IPv6 as well, or is not supported SNMPv3 over IPv6 yet? 3.4. Costs What were the parameters or model to estimate the extra costs??...that might be very useful to support the business case. I suggest to add to the document. I hope these comments can help to the authors and the community to adopt the document as WG item. Thanks a lot. Alexis Muñoz -----Original Message----- From: v6ops-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Santiago Aggio Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 9:38 AM To: v6ops@ietf.org Subject: [v6ops] IPv6 Operational Guidelines for DC (draft-lopez-v6ops-dc-ipv6-04) Dear Authors, My impression is that this very good, very clear, is a guide that covers most of the realities faced by an operator and an engineer of a DC infrastructure to deploy IPv6, with several considerations that help in the moment of decision and the work involved in the technical side of the routing, management and monitoring. The architecture described is very simple and clear, and very well the above stages to reach IPv6-only model. The references also seem to cover these aspects. Great Job!!!!, Congratulations Santiago Aggio Bahia Blanca Argentina. _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
- Re: [v6ops] IPv6 Operational Guidelines for DC (d… Arturo Servin
- Re: [v6ops] IPv6 Operational Guidelines for DC (d… Alexis Munoz (Gmail)
- Re: [v6ops] IPv6 Operational Guidelines for DC (d… Arturo Servin
- [v6ops] IPv6 Operational Guidelines for DC (draft… Santiago Aggio