Subject: Re: [armd] Need to reach consensus on ARMD problem domain

From: T Sridhar <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 22:55:56 -0800

* *

**

I agree with Anoop's point in terms of the first problem.  It would be good
to have the IETF address this through a WG.

Thanks,

Sridhar*
*

______________________________________________________
**

**

I was not at the meeting so I may be missing some

critical information with respect to the problems

and solutions that were discussed.  That said...

I view the first problem of being one where I want

to stretch a subnet across multiple ToR switches in the

data center, and where I want to avoid having ARPs go across

the backbone to the extent that it is possible to avoid it.  I

definitely think we should do something to address that

problem.  If we don’t address it in a working group,

folks are going to address it in a non-interoperable way.

I’m not clear on what the second problem is and how we

would go about solving it.

Anoop

*_______________*

*
*

*From:* [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] *On
Behalf Of *Linda
Dunbar
*Sent:* Tuesday, November 30, 2010 3:34 PM
*To:* [email-masked]; [email-masked]
*Cc:* 'Jari Arkko'; 'Ralph Droms'
*Subject:* [armd] Need to reach concensus on ARMD problem domain

During afterwards discussion on how to move ARMD forward, we were pointed
out that there are two different areas being addressed by ARMD problem
statements:

One is the general ARP problem associated with massive number of hosts

   - The massive number of client subnets in Data Center will cause similar
      problems to networks in data center with virtualized servers.

Another one is ARP can actually be used as solution to quickly update
intermediate switches’ FDB when hosts (VMs) migrate from one location to
another.

   - (our original thought is about there will be more ARPs when VMs
      migrate. The bullet listed in the ARMD Problem Statement is to justify
      urgency to enhance ARP).

We’d like to hear people’s opinion on if ARMD problem domain should include
only the first one or both (i.e. ARP needing extension to be used in data
center with large number of hosts and ARP as solution for Layer 2 switches
quick convergence)?

Your input is appreciated.

Linda Dunbar