RFC 8151
Use Cases for Data Center Network Virtualization Overlay Networks
Use Cases for Data Center Network Virtualization Overlay Networks 💖
Okay bestie, this is RFC 8151, and it's an Informational doc, so it's not a standards-track spec 🎀. It was written by L. Yong, L. Dunbar, M. Toy, A. Isaac, and V. Manral from Huawei, Verizon, Juniper Networks, and Nano Sec Co, and it came out in May 2017 ✨. ISSN 2070-1721. It doesn't obsolete or update any other RFCs 🦋. It's the one that walks through the NVO3 use cases you can deploy across different data centers 🌸.
Abstract
okay so the abstract is the quick pitch 💅. This doc describes Network Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) use cases that can be deployed in various data centers and serve different data-center applications 🧚.
Status of This Memo
Okay, this section is the legal-ish stuff, but it's important 📜. The doc is not an Internet Standards Track spec, it's published just for info 🌈. It's an IETF product, it reflects IETF community consensus, got public review, and was approved by the IESG. Not every IESG-approved doc is a candidate for any level of Internet Standard, so check Section 2 of RFC 7841 if you're curious 🫶. For the current status, errata, or feedback, go to http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8151 💜.
Copyright Notice
Copyright is held by the IETF Trust and the document authors, 2017, all rights reserved 🔥. This doc is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) as they were on the publication date 💅. Read those carefully, because they spell out your rights. Any Code Components pulled from this doc must include the Simplified BSD License text, as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions, and they come with no warranty as described in that license 🎀.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................3
1.1. Terminology ................................................4
1.2. NVO3 Background ............................................5
2. DC with a Large Number of Virtual Networks ......................6
3. DC NVO3 Virtual Network and External Network Interconnection ....6
3.1. DC NVO3 Virtual Network Access via the Internet ............7
3.2. DC NVO3 Virtual Network and SP WAN VPN Interconnection .....8
4. DC Applications Using NVO3 ......................................9
4.1. Supporting Multiple Technologies ...........................9
4.2. DC Applications Spanning Multiple Physical Zones ..........10
4.3. Virtual Data Center (vDC) .................................10
5. Summary ........................................................12
6. Security Considerations ........................................12
7. IANA Considerations ............................................12
8. Informative References .........................................13
Acknowledgements...................................................14
Contributors ......................................................15
Authors' Addresses.................................................161. Introduction ✨
Okay so server virtualization totally changed IT 🌸, in terms of how efficient, cheap, and fast it is to roll out new apps and services like cloud stuff. But traditional data center (DC) networks kinda struggle to support cloud apps and multi-tenant networks [RFC7364] 💀. The whole goal of data center Network Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) networks is to decouple the communication between tenant systems from the DC's physical infrastructure, so one physical network can do three big things 👑:
- carry many NVO3 virtual networks and keep the traffic of different NVO3 virtual networks isolated on that physical network 🦋.
- give each individual NVO3 virtual network its own independent address space, like MAC and IP 💖.
- support flexible Virtual Machines (VMs) and/or workload placement, including moving them from one server to another without needing VM address changes or physical infrastructure network configuration changes, plus the ability to do a "hot move" with no disruption to the live app running on those VMs 🧚.
These NVO3 virtual network (VN) characteristics help fix the problems cloud apps face in data centers [RFC7364] 🫶.
Hosts in one NVO3 VN can talk to hosts in another NVO3 VN, whether that other VN runs on the same physical network or a different one, through a gateway 🌈. The use-case examples for that latter situation are:
- DCs moving toward an NVO3 solution do it in steps, so some tenant systems in a VN are on virtualized servers while others still live on a LAN 🎀.
- lots of DC apps serve Internet users who are on different physical networks 💜.
- some apps are CPU bound, like Big Data analytics, and may not run on virtualized resources 🍓.
The inter-VN policies are usually enforced by the gateway 🔥.
This doc describes general NVO3 VN use cases that apply to various data centers 💅. These use cases show the DC provider's interests and their vision for cloud services. The doc groups them into three categories, from simple to sophisticated to implement 🌸. But the implementation details are outside the scope of this doc, so don't look for them here 🙈. The three categories are:
- Basic NVO3 VNs (Section 2). All Tenant Systems (TSs) in the network are in the same DC. The individual networks can be Layer 2 (L2) or Layer 3 (L3) 🦋. The number of NVO3 VNs in a DC is way bigger than what traditional VLAN-based virtual networks [IEEE802.1Q] can support 💖.
- A virtual network that spans multiple DCs and/or customer premises, where NVO3 virtual networks are built and interconnect other virtual or physical networks outside the DC ✨. An enterprise customer might use a traditional carrier-grade VPN or an IPsec tunnel over the Internet to reach its systems in the DC 🧚. This is covered in Section 3.
- DC apps or services that need an advanced network with several NVO3 virtual networks interconnected by gateways 👑. Three scenarios are in Section 4: (1) supporting multiple technologies; (2) building several virtual networks as a tenant network; and (3) applying NVO3 to a virtual Data Center (vDC) 🎀.
The doc uses the architecture reference model defined in [RFC7365] to describe the use cases 🫶.
1.1. Terminology 📖
This doc uses the terminology from [RFC7365] and [RFC4364] 🌈. A few extra terms are listed below 💜.
ASBR: : Autonomous System Border Router. 🦋
DC: : Data Center. 🌸
DMZ: : Demilitarized Zone. A computer or small subnetwork between a more-trusted internal network, such as a corporate private LAN, and an untrusted or less-trusted external network, such as the public Internet. 🔥
DNS: : Domain Name Service [RFC1035]. 💅
DC Operator: : An entity that is responsible for constructing and managing all resources in DCs, including, but not limited to, computing, storage, networking, etc. 🎀
DC Provider: : An entity that uses its DC infrastructure to offer services to its customers. 💖
NAT: : Network Address Translation [RFC3022]. 🧚
vGW: : virtual GateWay. A gateway component used for an NVO3 virtual network to interconnect with another virtual/physical network. ✨
NVO3: : Network Virtualization over Layer 3. A virtual network that is implemented based on the NVO3 architecture. 🌈
PE: : Provider Edge. 🫶
SP: : Service Provider. 👑
TS: : A Tenant System, which can be instantiated on a physical server or virtual machine (VM). 🍓
VRF-LITE: : Virtual Routing and Forwarding - LITE [VRF-LITE]. 💜
VN: : Virtual Network 🦋
VoIP: : Voice over IP 📞
WAN VPN: : Wide Area Network Virtual Private Network [RFC4364] [RFC7432]. 🌸
1.2. NVO3 Background 🧠
An NVO3 virtual network sits in a DC and is implemented based on the NVO3 architecture [RFC8014] 💅. People often call this an overlay architecture 🌷. The traffic in an NVO3 virtual network gets encapsulated at a Network Virtualization Edge (NVE) [RFC8014], then carried through a tunnel to another NVE, where it's decapsulated and sent to a destination Tenant System (TS) 🦋. The NVO3 architecture decouples NVO3 virtual networks from the DC physical network configuration 💖. It uses common tunnels to carry NVO3 traffic belonging to multiple NVO3 virtual networks 🎀.
An NVO3 virtual network can be an L2 or L3 domain 🧚. The network gives switching (L2) or routing (L3) capability to support host (i.e., TS) communications ✨. An NVO3 virtual network may be required to carry unicast traffic and/or multicast or broadcast/unknown-unicast (for L2 only) traffic to and from TSs 👑. There are several ways to transport NVO3 virtual network Broadcast, Unknown Unicast, and Multicast (BUM) traffic [NVO3MCAST] 🌈. An NVO3 virtual network provides communications among TSs in a DC, and a TS can be a physical server/device or a VM on a server end-device [RFC7365] 🫶.
(Part 1 of 3. More coming, so stay tuned, bestie 💜✨)
2. DC with a Large Number of Virtual Networks ✨
okay so a DC provider is constantly running NVO3 virtual networks for internal apps, bestie 🏢💖 Each app lives on loads of VMs or physical servers, and the provider needs every app walled off from the others 🧱 A DC can run a LOT of NVO3 virtual networks at once to support tons of apps, whereas a traditional VLAN setup based on IEEE 802.1Q is capped at 4094 VLANs 🙈 that's giving "not enough room" energy fr
Apps on VMs can need totally different amounts of compute, so some servers end up short on resources while others are basically just sitting there doing nothing 💀 a resource shortage can tank application performance, and nobody wants that 😭 so DC operators really want to move VMs around (workload movement) to optimize resource usage 🔥 VM dynamic placement and mobility means the binding between a TS and an NVE keeps changing a lot 🦋 the TS reachability update mechanisms have to be way faster than the typical retransmission Timeout window of a reliable transport protocol like TCP and Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), so endpoints' transport connections don't get messed up when a TS gets bound to a different NVE 💅 being able to support many TSs in a virtual network and many virtual networks in a DC is critical for an NVO3 solution, no cap 👑
When NVO3 virtual networks keep VMs from different apps separated, DC operators can assign MAC and/or IP address space to each virtual network on their own 🎀 that's so much more flexible than making every host in every NVO3 virtual network share one address space 🌸 meanwhile, typical use of IEEE 802.1Q VLANs needs a single common MAC address space, which is so much less chill 🙄
3. DC NVO3 Virtual Network and External Network Interconnection 🌈
Lots of customers (enterprises or individuals) use a DC provider's compute and storage to run their apps, and they need to reach their systems hosted in a DC through the Internet or Service Providers' Wide Area Networks (WAN) 🌍 A DC provider can build an NVO3 virtual network that connects all the resources assigned to a customer, and the customer gets in through a virtual GateWay (vGW) 🚪 WAN connectivity to the vGW can come from VPN technologies like IPsec VPNs [RFC4301] and BGP/MPLS IP VPNs [RFC4364] 🔐
If a virtual network spans multiple DC sites, one NVO3 design is to let the network stretch across the sites without DC gateway routers terminating it 🧚 the tunnel between a pair of NVEs can get carried inside other intermediate tunnels over the Internet or other WANs, or an intra-DC tunnel and inter-DC tunnel(s) can be stitched together into an end-to-end tunnel between the pair of NVEs in different DC sites 🦋 both cases form one NVO3 virtual network across multiple DC sites ✨
Two use cases are covered in the following sections 💖
3.1. DC NVO3 Virtual Network Access via the Internet 🌐
A customer can connect to an NVO3 virtual network over the Internet in a secure way 🔐 Figure 1 shows an example. The NVO3 virtual network has an instance at NVE1 and NVE2, and the two NVEs are connected by an IP tunnel in the DC 🧵 a set of TSs is attached to NVE1 on a server, and NVE2 lives on a DC Gateway device 🖥️ NVE2 terminates the tunnel and uses the VN Identifier (VNID) on the packet to pass it to the matching vGW entity on the DC GW (the vGW is the default gateway for the virtual network) 🫶 a customer can reach their systems, i.e., TS1 or TSn, in the DC over the Internet using an IPsec tunnel [RFC4301] 🔒 that IPsec tunnel is configured between the vGW and the customer gateway at the customer site 💅 either a static route or Internal Border Gateway Protocol (IBGP) may be used for prefix advertisement 📣 the vGW provides IPsec functionality such as authentication scheme and encryption, and IBGP traffic is carried inside the IPsec tunnel 🛡️ some vGW features are listed below:
- The vGW maintains the TS/NVE mappings and advertises the TS prefix to the customer via static route or IBGP. 🗺️
- Some vGW functions such as the firewall and load-balancer (LB) can be performed by locally attached network appliance devices. 🔥
- If the NVO3 virtual network uses different address space than external users, then the vGW needs to provide the NAT function. 🎭
- More than one IPsec tunnel can be configured for redundancy. 🫧
- 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. 💻
- DC operators need to construct a vGW for each customer. 👑
Server+---------------+
| TS1 TSn |
| |...| |
| +-+---+-+ | Customer Site
| | NVE1 | | +-----+
| +---+---+ | | GW |
+------+--------+ +--+--+
| *
L3 Tunnel *
| *
DC GW +------+---------+ .--. .--.
| +---+---+ | ( '* '.--.
| | NVE2 | | .-.' * )
| +---+---+ | ( * Internet )
| +---+---+. | ( * /
| | vGW | * * * * * * * * '-' '-'
| +-------+ | | IPsec \../ \.--/'
| +--------+ | Tunnel
+----------------+
DC Provider Site
Figure 1: DC Virtual Network Access via the Internet3.2. DC NVO3 Virtual Network 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 an NVO3 virtual network in a DC site 🏢💕 The SP builds a VPN for the enterprise customer, and each enterprise site peers with an SP PE 📡 the DC provider and VPN SP can build an NVO3 virtual network and a WAN VPN independently, 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] 📖 using option "a" from [RFC4364] with VRF-LITE [VRF-LITE], both ASBRs (the DC GW and the SP PE) maintain a routing/forwarding table (VRF) 🗂️ using option "b" from [RFC4364], the DC ASBR and SP ASBR do NOT maintain the VRF table; they only keep the NVO3 virtual network and VPN identifier mappings (label mapping) and swap the label on packets during forwarding 🔄 both option "a" and option "b" let the NVO3 VNs and VPNs keep using their own identifiers, and two identifiers get mapped at the DC GW 🧩 with option "c" from [RFC4364], the VN and VPN use the same identifier and both ASBRs perform the tunnel stitching (tunnel segment mapping) 🪡 each option has pros and cons [RFC4364] and has been deployed in SP networks depending on application requirements 💅 BGP is used in these options for route distribution between DCs and SP WANs 📣 if the DC is the SP's own DC, the DC GW and SP PE can be merged into one device that does the interworking of the VN and VPN within an Autonomous System 🫧
These solutions let enterprise networks talk to the tenant systems attached to the NVO3 virtual network in the DC without interfering with the DC provider's underlying physical networks or other NVO3 virtual networks in the DC 🛡️ the enterprise can use its own address space in the NVO3 virtual network 🎀 the DC provider can manage which VM and storage elements attach to the NVO3 virtual network 🧑💻 the enterprise customer manages which applications run on the VMs without knowing where the VMs are in the DC 🙈 (See Section 4 for more information.)
Also, in this use case, the DC operator can move the VMs assigned to the enterprise from one server to another in the DC without the enterprise customer noticing, i.e., with no impact on the enterprise's "live" applications 🦋 these advanced technologies bring DC providers great benefits in offering cloud services, but they also add some requirements for NVO3 [RFC7364] 🌟
4. DC Applications Using NVO3 💜
NVO3 technology gives DC operators flexibility in designing and deploying different applications in an end-to-end virtualization overlay environment 🧚 operators no longer have to worry about the constraints of the DC physical network configuration when creating VMs and setting up a network to connect them 🙌 a DC provider may use NVO3 in various ways, alongside other physical networks and/or virtual networks in the DC 🌸 this section highlights some use cases for that 🍓
4.1. Supporting Multiple Technologies 🧩
Servers in a large DC are often installed at different times, so they may have different capabilities/features 🕰️ some servers may be virtualized while others aren't; some may have virtual switches while others don't 🖥️ for servers with Hypervisor-based virtual switches, some may support a standardized NVO3 encapsulation, some may not support any encapsulation, and some may support a documented encapsulation protocol (e.g., Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN) [RFC7348] and Network Virtualization using Generic Routing Encapsulation (NVGRE) [RFC7637]) or proprietary encapsulations 🫠 to build a tenant network across these servers and the Top-of-Rack (ToR) switches, operators can construct one traditional VLAN network and two virtual networks (one using VXLAN encapsulation and the other using NVGRE), then interconnect these three networks via a gateway or virtual GW 🌉 the GW does the packet encapsulation/decapsulation translation between the networks 🔁
Another case: some software of a tenant has high CPU and memory consumption, which only makes sense on standalone servers, while other software of the tenant is fine running on VMs 💻 but provider DC infrastructure is configured to use NVO3 to connect VMs and VLANs [IEEE802.1Q] to physical servers, so the tenant network needs interworking between NVO3 and traditional VLAN 🤓
4.2. DC Applications Spanning Multiple Physical Zones 🏰
A DC can be partitioned into multiple physical zones, each with different access permissions and running different applications 🚧 for example, a 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 can only communicate with the Web application in the front zone, and the back zone can only receive traffic from the application zone 🔐 in this case, communications between the zones must pass through one or more security functions in a physical DMZ zone 🛡️ each zone can be implemented by one NVO3 virtual network, and the security functions in the DMZ zone can be used between two NVO3 virtual networks, i.e., two zones 🤝 if network functions (NFs), especially the security functions in the physical DMZ, can't process encapsulated NVO3 traffic, the NVO3 tunnels have to be terminated so the NF can do its processing on the application traffic 😭✨
4.3. Virtual Data Center (vDC) 🏢
okay so an enterprise DC can have routers, switches, and network appliances building its internal network, its DMZ, and its external network access 🧱, and it can have tons of servers and storage running all kinds of apps. with NVO3, a DC provider can build a vDC on top of its physical DC infrastructure and offer it as a service to enterprise customers ✨. the vDC at the provider's site gives you the same capability as a physical DC at the customer's site 💅. the customer manages their own apps running in their vDC, and the provider can offer different network service functions on top, like a firewall, DNS, LB, gateway, etc. 🛡️
Figure 2 shows one of these setups at the service-abstraction level 🦋. In this example, the vDC has several L2 VNs (L2VNx, L2VNy, L2VNz) that group the tenant systems together on a per-application basis 🧁, plus one L3 VN (L3VNa) for internal routing. A network firewall and gateway runs on a VM or server that connects to L3VNa and handles inbound and outbound traffic 🔥. An LB lives in L2VNx 💖. A VPN is also built between the gateway and the enterprise router 🔐. The enterprise runs Web, Mail, and Voice apps on VMs inside the vDC 🎀. Enterprise users reach those apps through the VPN, while Internet users get to them through the gateway/firewall at the DC provider site 🌐.
Internet ^ Internet
|
^ +--+---+
| | GW |
| +--+---+
| |
+-------+--------+ +--+---+
|Firewall/Gateway+--- VPN-----+router|
+-------+--------+ +-+--+-+
| | |
...+.... |..|
+-------: L3 VNa :---------+ LANs
+-+-+ ........ |
|LB | | | Enterprise Site
+-+-+ | |
...+... ...+... ...+...
: L2VNx : : L2VNy : : L2VNz :
....... ....... .......
|..| |..| |..|
| | | | | |
Web App. Mail App. VoIP App.
DC Provider SiteFigure 2: Virtual Data Center Abstraction View 📸
The enterprise customer decides which apps should be reachable only over the intranet and which should be reachable over both the intranet and the Internet 🧐. Then they set up the right security policy and gateway function on the firewall/gateway 🔒. An enterprise customer may also want multi-zones in a vDC (see Section 4.2) 🍭, either for security or so they can give different apps different QoS levels 📶.
The vDC use case needs an NVO3 solution that gives DC operators an easy, quick way to create an NVO3 virtual network and NVEs for any vDC design ⚡. It also has to let them allocate TSs and assign those TSs to the right NVO3 virtual network 🗂️, show the vDC topology, and manage and configure individual elements in the vDC in a secure way 🔐💜.
5. Summary 🌈
okay recap time 📝✨. This document covers some general NVO3 use cases in DCs. Put them together and operators get the flexibility and capability to design much more sophisticated support for all kinds of cloud apps 👑.
DC services can vary a lot 🌸. NVO3 virtual networks make it possible to scale to a large number of virtual networks in a DC, and they keep the network infrastructure from being affected by the number of VMs or by dynamic workload changes 🦋.
NVO3 uses tunnel techniques to carry NVO3 traffic across the DC physical infrastructure network 🚇. A tunnel encapsulation protocol is necessary 🧩. An NVO3 tunnel may itself be tunneled over other intermediate tunnels across the Internet or other WANs 🌍.
An NVO3 virtual network in a DC may be accessed by external users in a secure way 🔐. Lots of existing technologies can help make that happen 💅.
6. Security Considerations 💀
okay this part is SERIOUS bestie 😭🚨. Security is a real concern. DC operators need to give each tenant a secured virtual network, which means one tenant's traffic has to be isolated from other tenants' traffic and must not leak into the underlay networks 🔒. Tenants are vulnerable to observation and data modification or injection by whoever operates the underlay, so they should only use operators they trust 🫣. DC operators also need to stop a tenant application from attacking their underlay DC networks 🛑. They also need to protect against one tenant application attacking another tenant application through the DC infrastructure network ⚠️. For example, a tenant application might try to generate a huge volume of traffic to overload the DC's underlying network 📉. One way to deal with that is to limit the bandwidth of such communications 🚦.
7. IANA Considerations 🧾
this one's short and sweet 🍬: this document does not require any IANA actions ✅.
8. Informative References 📚
[IEEE802.1Q] IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks -- Media Access Control (MAC) Bridges and
Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks", IEEE Std
802.1Q-2011, DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2011.6009146.
[NVO3MCAST] Ghanwani, A., Dunbar, L., McBride, M., Bannai, V., and
R. Krishnan, "A Framework for Multicast in Network
Virtualization Overlays", Work in Progress,
draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-07, May 2016.
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035,
DOI 10.17487/RFC1035, November 1987,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1035>.
[RFC3022] Srisuresh, P. and K. Egevang, "Traditional IP Network
Address Translator (Traditional NAT)", RFC 3022,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3022, January 2001,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3022>.
[RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, DOI 10.17487/RFC4301,
December 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4301>.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364,
February 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.
[RFC7348] Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., Duda, K., Agarwal, P.,
Kreeger, L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright,
"Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A
Framework for Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks
over Layer 3 Networks", RFC 7348,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7348>.
[RFC7364] Narten, T., Ed., Gray, E., Ed., Black, D., Fang, L.,
Kreeger, L., and M. Napierala, "Problem Statement:
Overlays for Network Virtualization", RFC 7364,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7364, October 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7364>.
[RFC7365] Lasserre, M., Balus, F., Morin, T., Bitar, N., and Y.
Rekhter, "Framework for Data Center (DC) Network
Virtualization", RFC 7365, DOI 10.17487/RFC7365,
October 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7365>.
[RFC7432] Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A.,
Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS-
Based Ethernet VPN", RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432,
February 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7432>.
[RFC7637] Garg, P., Ed., and Y. Wang, Ed., "NVGRE: Network
Virtualization Using Generic Routing Encapsulation",
RFC 7637, DOI 10.17487/RFC7637, September 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7637>.
[RFC8014] Black, D., Hudson, J., Kreeger, L., Lasserre, M., and
T. Narten, "An Architecture for Data-Center Network
Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3)", RFC 8014,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8014, December 2016,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8014>.
[VRF-LITE] Cisco, "Configuring VRF-lite",
<http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/
catalyst4500/12-2/31sg/configuration/guide/conf/
vrf.pdf>.Acknowledgements 🫶
the authors want to give a huge thank you to Sue Hares, Young Lee, David Black, Pedro Marques, Mike McBride, David McDysan, Randy Bush, Uma Chunduri, Eric Gray, David Allan, Joe Touch, Olufemi Komolafe, Matthew Bocci, and Alia Atlas 💜 for all the reviews, comments, and suggestions 🌟.
Contributors 🎀
David Black
Dell EMC
176 South Street
Hopkinton, MA 01748
United States of America
Email: David.Black@dell.com
Vinay Bannai
PayPal
2211 N. First Street
San Jose, CA 95131
United States of America
Phone: +1-408-967-7784
Email: vbannai@paypal.com
Ram Krishnan
Brocade Communications
San Jose, CA 95134
United States of America
Phone: +1-408-406-7890
Email: ramk@brocade.com
Kieran Milne
Juniper Networks
1133 Innovation Way
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
United States of America
Phone: +1-408-745-2000
Email: kmilne@juniper.netAuthors' Addresses 🦋
Lucy Yong
Huawei Technologies
Phone: +1-918-808-1918
Email: lucy.yong@huawei.com
Linda Dunbar
Huawei Technologies,
5340 Legacy Drive
Plano, TX 75025
United States of America
Phone: +1-469-277-5840
Email: linda.dunbar@huawei.com
Mehmet Toy
Verizon
Email: mehmet.toy@verizon.com
Aldrin Isaac
Juniper Networks
1133 Innovation Way
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
United States of America
Email: aldrin.isaac@gmail.com
Vishwas Manral
Nano Sec Co
3350 Thomas Rd.
Santa Clara, CA
United States of America
Email: vishwas@nanosec.ioThat's the whole RFC, bestie! 🌈👑💖
📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc8151 2017-05
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms