Re: [vnrg] Status of the VNRG: Dormant or dead?

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Wed, 06 July 2011 16:49 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: vnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7186221F865A for <vnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 09:49:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.164, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M50JdlY-xpCH for <vnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 09:49:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com [67.222.54.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 963C921F85BE for <vnrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 09:49:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 5417 invoked by uid 0); 6 Jul 2011 16:49:28 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by cpoproxy3.bluehost.com with SMTP; 6 Jul 2011 16:49:28 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=labn.net; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:X-Enigmail-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=iQzefmX2TytA1cUxrrVysy9Q33CaOwPzvcACmT4yMUOj526f1NLdRqG6uY4r8kDSdzZlGbj1JKZ4rWT1Hmfu3oMKpMRz3WVtHVgfgPMMIuhXq2N26sJnadFm4lW3DQ2n;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1QeVHz-0000XG-PM; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 10:49:27 -0600
Message-ID: <4E149219.8020509@labn.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 12:49:29 -0400
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
References: <E84E7B8FF3F2314DA16E48EC89AB49F01CED6E4D@DAPHNIS.office.hd> <4E142E69.5040606@kit.edu> <4E148490.8000006@isi.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4E148490.8000006@isi.edu>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Cc: "vnrg@irtf.org" <vnrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [vnrg] Status of the VNRG: Dormant or dead?
X-BeenThere: vnrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Virtual Networks Research Group \(VNRG\) discussion list" <vnrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/vnrg>, <mailto:vnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/vnrg>
List-Post: <mailto:vnrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/vnrg>, <mailto:vnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 16:49:34 -0000

Joe,
	I really like & agree with much of what you say, particularly WRT
openflow, forces, and VPNs.

I think some potentially interesting topics for discussion would be:
- the differences (in requirements) between a VN and an overlay network
  (VPNs are just one type of overlay network after all),
- the requirements for the control interface at the VN/overlay-provider
boundary.

Lou

On 7/6/2011 11:51 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
> Hi, all,
> 
> (speaking as an individual participant)
> 
> On 7/6/2011 2:44 AM, Roland Bless wrote:
> ...
>>> We had the last meeting at the Beijing IETF meeting and also some lively discussion afterwards.
>>>
>>> One of the areas of discussion was (amongst many others):
>>> - openflow vs. forces
>>> - how forces would fit in virtual networks
>>
>> I see both technologies mainly focused on control plane / data plane
>> separation.
> 
> I agree, and don't see either as particularly relevant to VNs. They're 
> implementation issues, AFAICT. The more relevant technology to me is 
> router virtualization.
> 
>>> - do we need tunnel headers for virtual networks on the wire or not?
>>
>> That depends on the substrate technology, some allow to embed a "VNet
>> Tag" to identify different virtual links, e.g., VLAN-Tags in Ethernet
>> headers.
> 
> Again, this is an implementation issue. I would expect some sort of 
> indicator of VN, which can be buried inside an existing header or can 
> require an additional header.
> 
>>> - definition of acid tests
>>
>> Not only definition of acid tests, but also definition of
>> terms. For instance, how differ traditional VPNs from Virtual
>> Networks in the context of network virtualization? IMHO current
>> VPN solutions concentrate mainly on virtual links, advanced concepts
>> consider virtual nodes as active elements.
> 
> IMO, a VPN extends an existing network to add a new node, or ties two 
> existing networks together, i.e., it's a way to add a single private 
> link to a new node.
> 
> Further, VPN nodes are always a member of exactly one VPN.
> 
> A PPVPN is a network provided by another party (the provider) so that 
> users can join it via basically conventional VPN methods.
> 
> I don't think of VPNs as addressing either link or router multi-use, either.
> 
> None of this is true of VNs, IMO - a VN is a complete E2E network, can 
> coexist with many other VNs (even to the same endpoint nodes), etc.
> 
>  > How do OpenFlow concepts fit
>> into the classification?
> 
> IMO, Openflow is a tool; it does not define a network architecture. It 
> can be useful in moving some network issues elsewhere (e.g., allowing a 
> non-VPN capable node to join a VPN, or helping to implement router 
> virtualization outside a router that doesn't support it). I don't see 
> Openflow as anything other than one of many tools here - and one I've 
> never needed to develop VNs (if others do, I'd be glad to hear why).
> 
>>> What do you see is important for the RG right now or what is missing?
>>
>> See above, but maybe we should also consider questions such as
>> what interfaces and protocols are needed for creating inter-provider
>> virtual networks.
> 
> That seems to presume we know what an intra-provider VN is, and I'm not 
> sure we're all on a single page there... ;-)
> 
> Joe
> _______________________________________________
> vnrg mailing list
> vnrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/vnrg
> 
> 
> 
>