NVO3 Encapsulation Considerations
draft-ietf-nvo3-encap-05
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Sami Boutros | ||
| Last updated | 2020-08-20 (Latest revision 2020-02-17) | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
INTDIR Telechat review
(of
-11)
by Wassim Haddad
Ready w/nits
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | Matthew Bocci | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | Matthew Bocci <matthew.bocci@nokia.com> |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
As communicated by WG Chairs, the IETF NVO3 chairs and Routing Area director have chartered a design team to take forward the encapsulation discussion and see if there is potential to design a common encapsulation that addresses the various technical concerns. There are implications of different encapsulations in real environments consisting of both software and hardware implementations and spanning multiple data centers. For example, OAM functions such as path MTU discovery become challenging with multiple encapsulations along the data path. The design team recommend Geneve with few modifications as the common encapsulation, more details are described in section 7.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)