draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-08.txt   draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-09.txt 
skipping to change at page 1, line 15 skipping to change at page 1, line 15
Expires: Jan 2015 Expires: Jan 2015
Thomas Morin Thomas Morin
France Telecom Orange France Telecom Orange
Nabil Bitar Nabil Bitar
Verizon Verizon
Yakov Rekhter Yakov Rekhter
Juniper Juniper
July 2, 2014 July 4, 2014
Framework for DC Network Virtualization Framework for DC Network Virtualization
draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-08.txt draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-09.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document provides a framework for Data Center (DC) Network This document provides a framework for Data Center (DC) Network
Virtualization Overlays (NVO3) and it defines a reference model Virtualization Overlays (NVO3) and it defines a reference model
along with logical components required to design a solution. along with logical components required to design a solution.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
skipping to change at page 1, line 41 skipping to change at page 1, line 41
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as
reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on Jan 2, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on Jan 4, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 3, line 5 skipping to change at page 3, line 5
3.1.5.3. Address advertisement and tunnel mapping.........15 3.1.5.3. Address advertisement and tunnel mapping.........15
3.1.5.4. Overlay Tunneling................................15 3.1.5.4. Overlay Tunneling................................15
3.2. Multi-homing............................................16 3.2. Multi-homing............................................16
3.3. VM Mobility.............................................17 3.3. VM Mobility.............................................17
4. Key aspects of overlay networks..............................17 4. Key aspects of overlay networks..............................17
4.1. Pros & Cons.............................................17 4.1. Pros & Cons.............................................17
4.2. Overlay issues to consider..............................19 4.2. Overlay issues to consider..............................19
4.2.1. Data plane vs Control plane driven.................19 4.2.1. Data plane vs Control plane driven.................19
4.2.2. Coordination between data plane and control plane..19 4.2.2. Coordination between data plane and control plane..19
4.2.3. Handling Broadcast, Unknown Unicast and Multicast (BUM) 4.2.3. Handling Broadcast, Unknown Unicast and Multicast (BUM)
traffic..................................................19 traffic...................................................19
4.2.4. Path MTU..........................................20 4.2.4. Path MTU...........................................20
4.2.5. NVE location trade-offs...........................21 4.2.5. NVE location trade-offs............................21
4.2.6. Interaction between network overlays and underlays.22 4.2.6. Interaction between network overlays and underlays.22
5. Security Considerations.....................................22 5. Security Considerations......................................22
6. IANA Considerations.........................................23 6. IANA Considerations..........................................23
7. References..................................................23 7. References...................................................23
7.1. Informative References.................................23 7.1. Informative References..................................23
8. Acknowledgments.............................................24 8. Acknowledgments..............................................25
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document provides a framework for Data Center (DC) Network This document provides a framework for Data Center (DC) Network
Virtualization over Layer3 (L3) tunnels. This framework is intended Virtualization over Layer3 (L3) tunnels. This framework is intended
to aid in standardizing protocols and mechanisms to support large- to aid in standardizing protocols and mechanisms to support large-
scale network virtualization for data centers. scale network virtualization for data centers.
[NVOPS] defines the rationale for using overlay networks in order to [NVOPS] defines the rationale for using overlay networks in order to
build large multi-tenant data center networks. Compute, storage and build large multi-tenant data center networks. Compute, storage and
skipping to change at page 14, line 5 skipping to change at page 14, line 5
corresponding tunneling header. The tunneling state at the endpoints corresponding tunneling header. The tunneling state at the endpoints
may be configured or dynamically established. Solutions should may be configured or dynamically established. Solutions should
specify the tunneling technology used, whether it is stateful or specify the tunneling technology used, whether it is stateful or
stateless. In this document, however, tunneling and tunneling stateless. In this document, however, tunneling and tunneling
encapsulation are used interchangeably to simply mean the encapsulation are used interchangeably to simply mean the
encapsulation of a tenant packet with a tunneling header necessary encapsulation of a tenant packet with a tunneling header necessary
to carry the packet between an ingress NVE and an egress NVE across to carry the packet between an ingress NVE and an egress NVE across
the underlay. It should be noted that stateful tunneling, especially the underlay. It should be noted that stateful tunneling, especially
when configuration is involved, does impose management overhead and when configuration is involved, does impose management overhead and
scale constraints. When confidentiality is required, the use of scale constraints. When confidentiality is required, the use of
opportunistic encryption can be used as a stateless tunneling opportunistic security [OPPSEC] can be used as a stateless tunneling
solution. solution.
3.1.5. Control Plane Components 3.1.5. Control Plane Components
3.1.5.1. Distributed vs Centralized Control Plane 3.1.5.1. Distributed vs Centralized Control Plane
A control/management plane entity can be centralized or distributed. A control/management plane entity can be centralized or distributed.
Both approaches have been used extensively in the past. The routing Both approaches have been used extensively in the past. The routing
model of the Internet is a good example of a distributed approach. model of the Internet is a good example of a distributed approach.
Transport networks have usually used a centralized approach to Transport networks have usually used a centralized approach to
skipping to change at page 23, line 48 skipping to change at page 23, line 48
upon their agreed security requirements. upon their agreed security requirements.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
IANA does not need to take any action for this draft. IANA does not need to take any action for this draft.
7. References 7. References
7.1. Informative References 7.1. Informative References
[EVPN] Sajassi, A. et al, "BGP MPLS Based Ethernet VPN", draft- [EVPN] Sajassi, A. et al, "BGP MPLS Based Ethernet VPN", draft-
ietf-l2vpn-evpn (work in progress) ietf-l2vpn-evpn (work in progress)
[NVOPS] Narten, T. et al, "Problem Statement : Overlays for [NVOPS] Narten, T. et al, "Problem Statement : Overlays for
Network Virtualization", draft-ietf-nvo3-overlay-problem- Network Virtualization", draft-ietf-nvo3-overlay-problem-
statement (work in progress) statement (work in progress)
[OPPSEC] Dukhovni, V. "Opportunistic Security: some protection most
of the time", draft-dukhovni-opportunistic-security (work
in progress)
[RFC1191] Mogul, J. "Path MTU Discovery", RFC1191, November 1990 [RFC1191] Mogul, J. "Path MTU Discovery", RFC1191, November 1990
[RFC1981] McCann, J. et al, "Path MTU Discovery for IPv6", RFC1981, [RFC1981] McCann, J. et al, "Path MTU Discovery for IPv6", RFC1981,
August 1996 August 1996
[RFC2679] Almes, G. et al, "A One-way Delay Metric for IPPM", [RFC2679] Almes, G. et al, "A One-way Delay Metric for IPPM",
RFC2679, September 1999 RFC2679, September 1999
[RFC2680] Almes, G. et al, "A One-way Packet Loss Metric for IPPM", [RFC2680] Almes, G. et al, "A One-way Packet Loss Metric for IPPM",
RFC2680, September 1999 RFC2680, September 1999
 End of changes. 9 change blocks. 
14 lines changed or deleted 18 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/