Network Working Group L. Yong
Internet Draft Huawei
Category: Informational M. Toy
Comcast
A. Isaac
Bloomberg
V. Manral
Ionos Networks
L. Dunbar
Huawei
Expires: December 2016 June 3, 2016
Use Cases for Data Center Network Virtualization Overlays
draft-ietf-nvo3-use-case-08
Abstract
This document describes Data Center (DC) Network Virtualization over
Layer 3 (NVO3) use cases that can be deployed in various data
centers and serve different applications.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 3, 2016.
Yong, et al. [Page 1]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3
1.1. Terminology...............................................4
2. Basic Virtual Networks in a Data Center........................4
3. DC Virtual Network and External Network Interconnection........6
3.1. DC Virtual Network Access via the Internet................6
3.2. DC VN and SP WAN VPN Interconnection......................7
4. DC Applications Using NVO3.....................................8
4.1. Supporting Multiple Technologies and Applications.........9
4.2. Tenant Network with Multiple Subnets......................9
4.3. Virtualized Data Center (vDC)............................11
5. Summary.......................................................12
6. Security Considerations.......................................13
7. IANA Considerations...........................................13
8. References....................................................13
8.1. Normative References.....................................13
8.2. Informative References...................................13
Contributors.....................................................14
Acknowledgements.................................................15
Authors' Addresses...............................................15
Yong, et al. [Page 2]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
1. Introduction
Server Virtualization has changed the Information Technology (IT)
industry in terms of the efficiency, cost, and speed of providing
new applications and/or services such as cloud applications. However
traditional Data Center (DC) networks have some limits in supporting
cloud applications and multi tenant networks [RFC7364]. The goal of
Network Virtualization Overlays in the DC is to decouple the
communication among tenant systems from DC physical infrastructure
networks and to allow one physical network infrastructure to provide:
o Multi-tenant virtual networks and traffic isolation among the
virtual networks over the same physical network.
o Independent address spaces in individual virtual networks such as
MAC, IP, TCP/UDP etc.
o Flexible Virtual Machines (VM) and/or workload placement
including the ability to move them from one server to another
without requiring VM address and configuration changes, and the
ability to perform a "hot move" with no disruption to the live
application running on VMs.
These characteristics of NVO3 help address the issues that cloud
applications face in Data Centers [RFC7364].
An NVO3 network may interconnect with another NVO3 virtual network,
or another physical network (i.e., not the physical network that the
NVO3 network is over), via a gateway. The use case examples for the
latter are: 1) DCs that migrate toward an NVO3 solution will be done
in steps, where a portion of tenant systems in a VN is on
virtualized servers while others exist on a LAN. 2) many DC
applications serve to Internet users who are on physical networks; 3)
some applications are CPU bound, such as Big Data analytics, and may
not run on virtualized resources. Some inter-VN policies can be
enforced at the gateway.
This document describes general NVO3 use cases that apply to various
data centers. Three types of the use cases described in this
document are:
Yong, et al. [Page 3]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
o Basic NVO3 virtual networks in a DC (Section 2). All Tenant
Systems (TS) in the virtual network are located within the same
DC. The individual virtual networks can be either Layer 2 (L2) or
Layer 3 (L3). The number of NVO3 virtual networks in a DC is much
higher than what traditional VLAN based virtual networks [IEEE
802.1Q] can support. This case is often referred as to the DC
East-West traffic.
o Virtual networks that span across multiple Data Centers and/or to
customer premises, i.e., an NVO3 virtual network where some
tenant systems in a DC attach to interconnects another virtual or
physical network outside the data center. An enterprise customer
may use a traditional carrier VPN or an IPsec tunnel over the
Internet to communicate with its systems in the DC. This is
described in Section 3.
o DC applications or services require an advanced network that
contains several NVO3 virtual networks that are interconnected by
the gateways. Three scenarios are described in Section 4: 1)
using NVO3 and other network technologies to build a tenant
network; 2) constructing several virtual networks as a tenant
network; 3) applying NVO3 to a virtualized DC (vDC).
The document uses the architecture reference model defined in
[RFC7365] to describe the use cases.
1.1. Terminology
This document uses the terminologies defined in [RFC7365] and
[RFC4364]. Some additional terms used in the document are listed
here.
DMZ: Demilitarized Zone. A computer or small sub-network that sits
between a trusted internal network, such as a corporate private LAN,
and an un-trusted external network, such as the public Internet.
DNS: Domain Name Service [RFC1035]
NAT: Network Address Translation [RFC1631]
Note that a virtual network in this document refers to an NVO3
virtual network in a DC [RFC7365].
2. Basic Virtual Networks in a Data Center
A virtual network in a DC enables communications among Tenant
Systems (TS). A TS can be a physical server/device or a virtual
Yong, et al. [Page 4]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
machine (VM) on a server, i.e., end-device [RFC7365]. A Network
Virtual Edge (NVE) can be co-located with a TS, i.e., on the same
end-device, or reside on a different device, e.g., a top of rack
switch (ToR). A virtual network has a virtual network identifier
(can be globally unique or locally significant at NVEs).
Tenant Systems attached to the same NVE may belong to the same or
different virtual networks. An NVE provides tenant traffic
forwarding/encapsulation and obtains tenant systems reachability
information from a Network Virtualization Authority (NVA)[NVO3ARCH].
DC operators can construct multiple separate virtual networks, and
provide each with own address space.
Network Virtualization Overlay in this context means that a virtual
network is implemented with an overlay technology, i.e., within a DC
that has IP infrastructure, tenant traffic is encapsulated at its
local NVE and carried by a tunnel to another NVE where the packet is
decapsulated and sent to a target tenant system. This architecture
decouples tenant system address space and configuration from the
infrastructure's, which provides great flexibility for VM placement
and mobility. It also means that the transit nodes in the
infrastructure are not aware of the existence of the virtual
networks and tenant systems attached to the virtual networks. The
tunneled packets are carried as regular IP packets and are sent to
NVEs. One tunnel may carry the traffic belonging to multiple virtual
networks; a virtual network identifier is used for traffic
demultiplexing. A tunnel encapsulation protocol is necessary for NVE
to encapsulate the packets from Tenant Systems and encode other
information on the tunneled packets to support NVO3 implementation.
A virtual network implemented by NVO3 may be an L2 or L3 domain. The
virtual network can carry unicast traffic and/or multicast,
broadcast/unknown (for L2 only) traffic from/to tenant systems.
There are several ways to transport virtual network BUM traffic
[NVO3MCAST].
It is worth mentioning two distinct cases regarding to NVE location.
The first is where TSs and an NVE are co-located on a single end
host/device, which means that the NVE can be aware of the TS's state
at any time via an internal API. The second is where TSs and an NVE
are not co-located, with the NVE residing on a network device; in
this case, a protocol is necessary to allow the NVE to be aware of
the TS's state [NVO3HYVR2NVE].
One virtual network can provide connectivity to many TSs that attach
to many different NVEs in a DC. TS dynamic placement and mobility
results in frequent changes of the binding between a TS and an NVE.
Yong, et al. [Page 5]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
The TS reachability update mechanisms need be fast enough so that
the updates do not cause any communication disruption/interruption.
The capability of supporting many TSs in a virtual network and many
more virtual networks in a DC is critical for the NVO3 solution.
If a virtual network spans across multiple DC sites, one design is
to allow the network to seamlessly span across the sites without DC
gateway routers' termination. In this case, the tunnel between a
pair of NVEs can be carried within other intermediate tunnels over
the Internet or other WANs, or the intra DC and inter DC tunnels can
be stitched together to form a tunnel between the pair of NVEs that
are in different DC sites. Both cases will form one virtual network
across multiple DC sites.
3. DC Virtual Network and External Network Interconnection
Many customers (an enterprise or individuals) who utilize a DC
provider's compute and storage resources to run their applications
need to access their systems hosted in a DC through Internet or
Service Providers' Wide Area Networks (WAN). A DC provider can
construct a virtual network that provides connectivity to all the
resources designated for a customer and allows the customer to
access the resources via a virtual gateway (vGW). This, in turn,
becomes the case of interconnecting a DC virtual network and the
network at customer site(s) via the Internet or WANs. Two use cases
are described here.
3.1. DC Virtual Network Access via the Internet
A customer can connect to a DC virtual network via the Internet in a
secure way. Figure 1 illustrates this case. The DC virtual network
has an instance at NVE1 and NVE2 and the two NVEs are connected via
an IP tunnel in the Data Center. A set of tenant systems are
attached to NVE1 on a server. NVE2 resides on a DC Gateway device.
NVE2 terminates the tunnel and uses the VNID on the packet to pass
the packet to the corresponding vGW entity on the DC GW (the vGW is
the default gateway for the virtual network). A customer can access
their systems, i.e., TS1 or TSn, in the DC via the Internet by using
an IPsec tunnel [RFC4301]. The IPsec tunnel is configured between
the vGW and the customer gateway at the customer site. Either a
static route or iBGP may be used for prefix advertisement. The vGW
provides IPsec functionality such as authentication scheme and
encryption; iBGP protocol traffic is carried within the IPsec tunnel.
Some vGW features are listed below:
o The vGW maintains the TS/NVE mappings and advertises the TS
prefix to the customer via static route or iBGP.
Yong, et al. [Page 6]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
o Some vGW functions such as firewall and load balancer can be
performed by locally attached network appliance devices.
o If the virtual network in the DC uses different address space
than external users, then the vGW needs to provide the NAT
function.
o More than one IPsec tunnel can be configured for redundancy.
o The vGW can be implemented on a server or VM. In this case, IP
tunnels or IPsec tunnels can be used over the DC infrastructure.
o DC operators need to construct a vGW for each customer.
Server+---------------+
| TS1 TSn |
| |...| |
| +-+---+-+ | Customer Site
| | NVE1 | | +-----+
| +---+---+ | | CGW |
+------+--------+ +--+--+
| *
L3 Tunnel *
| *
DC GW +------+---------+ .--. .--.
| +---+---+ | ( '* '.--.
| | NVE2 | | .-.' * )
| +---+---+ | ( * Internet )
| +---+---+. | ( * /
| | vGW | * * * * * * * * '-' '-'
| +-------+ | | IPsec \../ \.--/'
| +--------+ | Tunnel
+----------------+
DC Provider Site
Figure 1 - DC Virtual Network Access via the Internet
3.2. DC VN and SP WAN VPN Interconnection
In this case, an Enterprise customer wants to use a Service Provider
(SP) WAN VPN [RFC4364] [RFC7432] to interconnect its sites with a
virtual network in a DC site. The Service Provider constructs a VPN
for the enterprise customer. Each enterprise site peers with an SP
PE. The DC Provider and VPN Service Provider can build a DC virtual
Yong, et al. [Page 7]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
network (VN) and VPN independently, and then interconnect them via a
local link, or a tunnel between the DC GW and WAN PE devices. The
control plane interconnection options between the DC and WAN are
described in RFC4364 [RFC4364]. Using Option A with VRF-LITE [VRF-
LITE], both ASBRs, i.e., DC GW and SP PE, maintain a
routing/forwarding table (VRF). Using Option B, the DC ASBR and SP
ASBR do not maintain the VRF table; they only maintain the VN and
VPN identifier mappings, i.e., label mapping, and swap the label on
the packets in the forwarding process. Both option A and B allow VN
and VPN using own identifier and two identifiers are mapped at DC GW.
With option C, the VN and VPN use the same identifier and both ASBRs
perform the tunnel stitching, i.e., tunnel segment mapping. Each
option has pros/cons [RFC4364] and has been deployed in SP networks
depending on the applications in use. BGP is used with these options
for route distribution between DCs and SP WANs. Note that if the DC
is the SP's Data Center, the DC GW and SP PE in this case can be
merged into one device that performs the interworking of the VN and
VPN within an AS.
The configurations above allow the enterprise networks to
communicate with the tenant systems attached to the VN in a DC
without interfering with the DC provider's underlying physical
networks and other virtual networks. The enterprise can use its own
address space in the VN. The DC provider can manage which VM and
storage elements attach to the VN. The enterprise customer manages
which applications run on the VMs in the VN without knowing the
location of the VMs in the DC. (See Section 4 for more)
Furthermore, in this use case, the DC operator can move the VMs
assigned to the enterprise from one sever to another in the DC
without the enterprise customer being aware, i.e., with no impact on
the enterprise's 'live' applications. Such advanced technologies
bring DC providers great benefits in offering cloud services, but
add some requirements for NVO3 [RFC7364] as well.
4. DC Applications Using NVO3
NVO3 technology provides DC operators with the flexibility in
designing and deploying different applications in an end-to-end
virtualization overlay environment. Operators no longer need to
worry about the constraints of the DC physical network configuration
when creating VMs and configuring a virtual network. A DC provider
may use NVO3 in various ways, in conjunction with other physical
networks and/or virtual networks in the DC for a reason. This
section highlights some use cases for this goal.
Yong, et al. [Page 8]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
4.1. Supporting Multiple Technologies and Applications
Servers deployed in a large data center are often installed at
different times, and may have different capabilities/features. Some
servers may be virtualized, while others may not; some may be
equipped with virtual switches, while others may not. For the
servers equipped with Hypervisor-based virtual switches, some may
support VxLAN [RFC7348] encapsulation, some may support NVGRE
encapsulation [RFC7637], and some may not support any encapsulation.
To construct a tenant network among these servers and the ToR
switches, operators can construct one traditional VLAN network and
two virtual networks where one uses VxLAN encapsulation and the
other uses NVGRE, and interconnect these three networks via a
gateway or virtual GW. The GW performs packet
encapsulation/decapsulation translation between the networks.
A data center may be also constructed with multi-tier zones, where
each zone has different access permissions and runs different
applications. For example, the three-tier zone design has a front
zone (Web tier) with Web applications, a mid zone (application tier)
where service applications such as credit payment or ticket booking
run, and a back zone (database tier) with Data. External users are
only able to communicate with the Web application in the front zone.
In this case, communications between the zones must pass through the
security GW/firewall. One virtual network can be configured in each
zone and a GW can be used to interconnect two virtual networks, i.e.,
two zones. If the virtual network in individual zones uses the
different implementations, the GW needs to support these
implementations as well.
4.2. Tenant Network with Multiple Subnets
A tenant network may contain multiple subnets. The DC physical
network needs to support the connectivity for many such tenant
networks. In some cases, the inter-subnet policies can be placed at
designated gateway devices. Such a design requires the inter-subnet
traffic to be sent to one of the gateway devices first for the
policy checking, which may cause traffic to "hairpin" at the gateway
in a DC. It is desirable for an NVE to be able to hold some policies
and be able to forward the inter-subnet traffic directly. To reduce
the burden on the NVE, a hybrid design may be deployed, i.e., an NVE
can perform forwarding for selected inter-subnets while the
designated GW performs forwarding for the rest. For example, each
NVE performs inter-subnet forwarding for intra-DC traffic while the
designated GW is used for traffic to/from a remote DC.
Yong, et al. [Page 9]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
A tenant network may span across multiple Data Centers that are at
different locations. DC operators may configure an L2 VN within each
DC and an L3 VN between DCs for a tenant network. For this
configuration, the virtual L2/L3 gateway can be implemented on the
DC GW device. Figure 2 illustrates this configuration.
Figure 2 depicts two DC sites. Site A constructs one L2 VN, say
L2VNa, on NVE1, NVE2, and NVE5. NVE1 and NVE2 reside on the servers
which host multiple tenant systems. NVE5 resides on the DC GW device.
Site Z has similar configuration, with L2VNz on NVE3, NVE4, and NVE6.
An L3 VN, L3VNx, is configured on NVE5 at Site A and the NVE6 at
Site Z. An internal Virtual Interface of Routing and Bridging (VIRB)
is used between the L2VNI and L3VNI on NVE5 and NVE6, respectively.
The L2VNI requires the MAC/NVE mapping table and the L3VNI requires
the IP prefix/NVE mapping table. A packet arriving at NVE5 from
L2VNa will be decapsulated, converted into an IP packet, and then
encapsulated and sent to Site Z. A packet to NVE5 from L3VNx will be
decapsulated, converted into a MAC frame, and then encapsulated and
sent within Site A. The ARP protocol [RFC826] can be used to get the
MAC address for an IP address in the L2VNa. The policies can be
checked at the VIRB.
Note that L2VNa, L2VNz, and L3VNx in Figure 2 are NVO3 virtual
networks.
NVE5/DCGW+------------+ +-----------+ NVE6/DCGW
| +-----+ | '''''''''''''''' | +-----+ |
| |L3VNI+----+' L3VNx '+---+L3VNI| |
| +--+--+ | '''''''''''''''' | +--+--+ |
| |VIRB | | VIRB| |
| +--+--+ | | +--+--+ |
| |L2VNI| | | |L2VNI| |
| +--+--+ | | +--+--+ |
+----+-------+ +------+----+
''''|'''''''''' ''''''|'''''''
' L2VNa ' ' L2VNz '
NVE1/S ''/'''''''''\'' NVE2/S NVE3/S'''/'''''''\'' NVE4/S
+-----+---+ +----+----+ +------+--+ +----+----+
| +--+--+ | | +--+--+ | | +---+-+ | | +--+--+ |
| |L2VNI| | | |L2VNI| | | |L2VNI| | | |L2VNI| |
| ++---++ | | ++---++ | | ++---++ | | ++---++ |
+--+---+--+ +--+---+--+ +--+---+--+ +--+---+--+
|...| |...| |...| |...|
Tenant Systems Tenant Systems
Yong, et al. [Page 10]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
DC Site A DC Site Z
Figure 2 - Tenant Virtual Network with Bridging/Routing
4.3. Virtualized Data Center (vDC)
An Enterprise Data Center today may deploy routers, switches, and
network appliance devices to construct its internal network, DMZ,
and external network access; it may have many servers and storage
running various applications. With NVO3 technology, a DC Provider
can construct a virtualized DC over its physical DC infrastructure
and offer a virtual DC service to enterprise customers. A vDC at the
DC Provider site provides the same capability as a physical DC at
the customer site. A customer manages their own applications running
in their vDC. A DC Provider can further offer different network
service functions to the customer. The network service functions may
include firewall, DNS, load balancer, gateway, etc.
Figure 3 below illustrates one such scenario. For simplicity, it
only shows the L3 VN or L2 VN in abstraction. In this example, the
DC Provider operators create several L2 VNs (L2VNx, L2VNy, L2VNz) to
group the tenant systems together on a per-application basis, and
one L3 VN (L3VNa) for the internal routing. A network firewall and
gateway runs on a VM or server that connects to L3VNa and is used
for inbound and outbound traffic processing. A load balancer (LB) is
used in L2VNx. A VPN is also built between the gateway and
enterprise router. The Enterprise customer runs Web/Mail/Voice
applications on VMs at the provider DC site which may be spread
across many servers. The users at the Enterprise site access the
applications running in the provider DC site via the VPN; Internet
users access these applications via the gateway/firewall at the
provider DC.
The Enterprise customer decides which applications should be
accessible only via the intranet and which should be assessable via
both the intranet and Internet, and configures the proper security
policy and gateway function at the firewall/gateway. Furthermore, an
enterprise customer may want multi-zones in a vDC (See section 4.1)
for the security and/or the ability to set different QoS levels for
the different applications.
The vDC use case requires the NVO3 solution to provide DC operators
with an easy and quick way to create a VN and NVEs for any vDC
design, to allocate TSs and assign TSs to the corresponding VN, and
to illustrate vDC topology and manage/configure individual elements
in the vDC in a secure way.
Yong, et al. [Page 11]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
Internet ^ Internet
|
^ +--+---+
| | GW |
| +--+---+
| |
+-------+--------+ +--+---+
|Firewall/Gateway+--- VPN-----+router|
+-------+--------+ +-+--+-+
| | |
...+.... |..|
+-------: L3 VNa :---------+ LANs
+-+-+ ........ |
|LB | | | Enterprise Site
+-+-+ | |
...+... ...+... ...+...
: L2VNx : : L2VNy : : L2VNz :
....... ....... .......
|..| |..| |..|
| | | | | |
Web Apps Mail Apps VoIP Apps
Provider DC Site
Figure 3 - Virtual Data Center (vDC)
5. Summary
This document describes some general and potential NVO3 use cases in
DCs. The combination of these cases will give operators the
flexibility and capability to design more sophisticated cases for
various cloud applications.
DC services may vary, from infrastructure as a service (IaaS), to
platform as a service (PaaS), to software as a service (SaaS).
In these services, NVO3 virtual networks are just a portion of such
services.
NVO3 uses tunnel techniques to deliver VN traffic over an IP network.
A tunnel encapsulation protocol is necessary. An NVO3 tunnel may in
Yong, et al. [Page 12]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
turn be tunneled over other intermediate tunnels over the Internet
or other WANs.
An NVO3 virtual network in a DC may be accessed by external users in
a secure way. Many existing technologies can help achieve this.
NVO3 implementations may vary. Some DC operators prefer to use a
centralized controller to manage tenant system reachability in a
virtual network, while other operators prefer to use distribution
protocols to advertise the tenant system location, i.e., NVE
location. When a tenant network spans across multiple DCs and WANs,
each network administration domain may use different methods to
distribute the tenant system locations. Both control plane and data
plane interworking are necessary.
6. Security Considerations
Security is a concern. DC operators need to provide a tenant with a
secured virtual network, which means one tenant's traffic is
isolated from other tenants' traffic as well as from non-tenants'
traffic. DC operators also need to prevent against a tenant
application attacking their underlying DC network through the
tenant's virtual network; further, they need to protect against a
tenant application attacking another tenant application via the DC
infrastructure network. For example, a tenant application attempts
to generate a large volume of traffic to overload the DC's
underlying network. An NVO3 solution has to address these issues.
7. IANA Considerations
This document does not request any action from IANA.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC7364] Narten, T., et al "Problem Statement: Overlays for Network
Virtualization", RFC7364, October 2014.
[RFC7365] Lasserre, M., Motin, T., and et al, "Framework for DC
Network Virtualization", RFC7365, October 2014.
8.2. Informative References
[IEEE 802.1Q] IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks -- Media Access Control (MAC) Bridges and Virtual
Bridged Local Area", IEEE Std 802.1Q, 2011.
Yong, et al. [Page 13]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
[NVO3HYVR2NVE] Li, Y., et al, "Hypervisor to NVE Control Plane
Requirements", draft-ietf-nvo3-hpvr2nve-cp-req-01, work in
progress.
[NVO3ARCH] Black, D., et al, "An Architecture for Overlay Networks
(NVO3)", draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-02, work in progress.
[NVO3MCAST] Ghanwani, A., "Framework of Supporting Applications
Specific Multicast in NVO3", draft-ghanwani-nvo3-app-
mcast-framework-02, work in progress.
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES - Implementation and
Specification", RFC1035, November 1987.
[RFC1631] Egevang, K., Francis, P., "The IP network Address
Translator (NAT)", RFC1631, May 1994.
[RFC4301] Kent, S., "Security Architecture for the Internet
Protocol", rfc4301, December 2005
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, February 2006.
[RFC7348] Mahalingam,M., Dutt, D., ific Multicast in etc "VXLAN: A
Framework for Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over
Layer 3 Networks", RFC7348 August 2014.
[RFC7432] Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A. and
J. Uttaro, "BGP MPLS Based Ethernet VPN", RFC7432,
February 2015
[RFC7637] Garg, P., and Wang, Y., "NVGRE: Network Virtualization
using Generic Routing Encapsulation", RFC7637, Sept. 2015.
[VRF-LITE] Cisco, "Configuring VRF-lite", http://www.cisco.com
Contributors
Vinay Bannai
PayPal
2211 N. First St,
San Jose, CA 95131
Phone: +1-408-967-7784
Email: vbannai@paypal.com
Yong, et al. [Page 14]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
Ram Krishnan
Brocade Communications
San Jose, CA 95134
Phone: +1-408-406-7890
Email: ramk@brocade.com
Kieran Milne
Juniper Networks
1133 Innovation Way
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
Phone: +1-408-745-2000
Email: kmilne@juniper.net
Acknowledgements
Authors like to thank Sue Hares, Young Lee, David Black, Pedro
Marques, Mike McBride, David McDysan, Randy Bush, Uma Chunduri, and
Eric Gray for the review, comments, and suggestions.
Authors' Addresses
Lucy Yong
Huawei Technologies
Phone: +1-918-808-1918
Email: lucy.yong@huawei.com
Mehmet Toy
Comcast
1800 Bishops Gate Blvd.,
Mount Laurel, NJ 08054
Phone : +1-856-792-2801
E-mail : mehmet_toy@cable.comcast.com
Aldrin Isaac
Bloomberg
E-mail: aldrin.isaac@gmail.com
Vishwas Manral
Yong, et al. [Page 15]
Internet-Draft NVO3 Use Case June 2016
Ionas Networks
Email: vishwas@ionosnetworks.com
Linda Dunbar
Huawei Technologies,
5340 Legacy Dr.
Plano, TX 75025 US
Phone: +1-469-277-5840
Email: linda.dunbar@huawei.com
Yong, et al. [Page 16]
