Subject: [nvo3] Use case draft comments

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:20:18 -0400

I've had a private discussion with the authors of the use case draft,
and they suggested I share some portion of it on the mailing list.

IMHO, the use case draft is a good start, but has a ways to go.  The
current draft is entirely focused on distributed use cases (no coverage
of single data center use cases).  The authors and I have differing
opinions about whether this is a "bug" or a "feature" ...
... I think it's a "feature" :-).

IMHO, a distributed use case draft with a focus on VPNs in general
could be useful in helping ground some of the current discussions
about VPN interactions with and relationships to nvo3.  What I mean by
"VPNs in general" is that I'd hope to see the draft deal with VPN
functionality in a sufficiently technology-neutral fashion so as to
cover L3VPNs, L2VPNs and site-to-site IPsec VPNs (which can offer L3
service or L2 service via use of L2TP within the IPsec encapsulation).
The current draft emphasizes L3VPNs. Remote access IPsec VPNs are
also relevant to nvo3, but site-to-site IPsec VPNs are much more
important, IMHO.

Such a draft could become the draft that I could've and/or should've
written for the Paris nvo3 BOF if I'd had the "copious spare time"
available :-).

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
[email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

---

From: Lucy yong <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 21:30:10 +0000

David,

Thank you to voice up on the use case draft. Please see inline.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 3:20 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [nvo3] Use case draft comments

[[LY]] yes.

[[LY]] If we have one use case draft, it should cover both cases, i.e. in one DC and spin to multiple DCs. If we separate them into two drafts, then I agree. IMHO, one draft is good.

[[LY]] thanks for the input. We will tweak the cases to include this as basic case.

Such a draft could become the draft that I could've and/or should've
written for the Paris nvo3 BOF if I'd had the "copious spare time"
available :-).
[[LY]] :-). Thank you to work on this and provide valuable input on the draft.

Thanks,
Lucy

Thanks,
--David

_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3