From talmi@marvell.com Sun Apr 1 12:01:55 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C9A121F89E3 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 12:01:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6hWr6bBZKWIm for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 12:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from galiil.marvell.com (galiil.marvell.com [199.203.130.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7092421F89CD for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 12:01:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Tal Mizrahi To: Benson Schliesser , "armd@ietf.org" Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 22:01:39 +0300 Thread-Topic: [armd] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-armd-problem-statement-02.txt Thread-Index: Ac0GWw+3Iv6irbgxRFCmPhhbTLw0AgJ3mBJg Message-ID: <74470498B659FA4687F0B0018C19A89C017E9730D22A@IL-MB01.marvell.com> References: <20120312201556.19696.53552.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4298A010-14A4-4D54-862D-6225841170D1@cisco.com> <573146A8-49CC-4669-9B92-D33EC318AE6B@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <573146A8-49CC-4669-9B92-D33EC318AE6B@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [armd] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-armd-problem-statement-02.txt X-BeenThere: armd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2012 19:01:55 -0000 Hi, Some comments are listed below. [Better late than never :] The document is well written, and IMO it is ready to proceed to the IESG pr= ocessing. In section 2: Although these are very basic terms, I suggest to add the acronyms: ARP, ND= , VLAN, ToR, EoR. Section 3 says "Today, it is not uncommon to support 10s of VMs per physica= l server." , while section 7.3 says "where a single physical machine now hosts ten (or= more) VMs". =3D=3D>The number of VMs per physical server should be consistent in the tw= o sections. Section 4.4.4 The first paragraph sounds like it describes a solution for address scaling= , and not a problem. It would be best to rephrase. Section 4.5.2: "Virtualization also can place additional requirements on the Aggregation s= witches in terms of address resolution table size" This assumes the scenario from 4.4.2 "L3 to Aggregation Switches" - it shou= ld be clarified, or rephrased. In section 7: The following sentence does not seem relevant any more: "It is a future act= ivity to determine which of these areas can or will be addressed by ARMD or= some other IETF WG." Typos:=20 "A switch used to aggregate network network connectivity from multiple rack= s." - the word network appears twice. "run applications that are are confined" - the word are appears twice. Regards, Tal Mizrahi. -----Original Message----- From: armd-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:armd-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ben= son Schliesser Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 7:34 AM To: armd@ietf.org Subject: Re: [armd] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-armd-problem-statement-02.txt This is just a reminder: we are in WG LC for draft-ietf-armd-problem-statem= ent-02 until 26-Mar-2012. Please review and post comments of support, non-s= upport, etc. Silence will be interpreted as consensus. But a discussion wou= ld be even better. Cheers, -Benson On Mar 12, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote: > The chairs would like to begin a 2 week Working Group Last Call on the AR= MD Problem Statement document draft-ietf-armd-problem-statement-02. (See th= e announcement message quoted below for reference.) Please read this lates= t version of the draft, and comment on the mailing list. This WG LC will c= lose on 26-March-2012. >=20 > Cheers, > -Benson and Linda >=20 >=20 > On Mar 12, 2012, at 3:15 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=20 >>=20 >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts direc= tories. This draft is a work item of the Address Resolution for Massive num= bers of hosts in the Data center Working Group of the IETF. >>=20 >> Title : Problem Statement for ARMD >> Author(s) : Thomas Narten >> Manish Karir >> Ian Foo >> Filename : draft-ietf-armd-problem-statement-02.txt >> Pages : 16 >> Date : 2012-03-12 >>=20 >> This document examines address resolution issues related to the =20 >> massive scaling of data centers. Our initial scope is relatively =20 >> narrow. Specifically, it focuses on address resolution (ARP and ND) =20 >> within the data center. >>=20 >>=20 >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-armd-problem-statement >> -02.txt >>=20 >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>=20 >> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-armd-problem-statement- >> 02.txt >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> armd mailing list >> armd@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/armd >=20 _______________________________________________ armd mailing list armd@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/armd From narten@us.ibm.com Wed Apr 4 08:25:02 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 040A321F87C1 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 08:25:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -109.49 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.49 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.109, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I-vuI6cN9dt1 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 08:25:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com (e32.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.150]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76ECE21F87D3 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 08:25:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from /spool/local by e32.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:25:00 -0600 Received: from d01dlp03.pok.ibm.com (9.56.224.17) by e32.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:24:58 -0600 Received: from d01relay03.pok.ibm.com (d01relay03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.235]) by d01dlp03.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AB24C90072 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 11:24:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay03.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q34FOtNo292364 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 11:24:55 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q34KtPvI015660 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 16:55:26 -0400 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-203-35.mts.ibm.com [9.65.203.35]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id q34KtFKL013931 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 4 Apr 2012 16:55:16 -0400 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id q34FJCMA017432; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 11:19:13 -0400 Message-Id: <201204041519.q34FJCMA017432@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> To: Benson Schliesser In-reply-to: <15B73861-C485-48F7-BB01-0F93BA0DB7AE@cisco.com> References: <15B73861-C485-48F7-BB01-0F93BA0DB7AE@cisco.com> Comments: In-reply-to Benson Schliesser message dated "Fri, 16 Mar 2012 17:51:09 -0500." Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 11:19:07 -0400 From: Thomas Narten X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12040415-3270-0000-0000-00000551D96B Cc: armd@ietf.org Subject: Re: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp X-BeenThere: armd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 15:25:02 -0000 I just had a quick look at this document. It appears to me to be a combination of "learning" and "proxy ARP". IMO, it needs a bit more detail on some aspects prior to publication, but that is a separate question. But, looking at draft-dunbar-armd-arp-nd-scaling-bcp-00.txt, it says: Recommendation: Revise RFC1027 with VLAN support and scalability for the Data Center Environment. I.e., update the Proxy ARP RFC. That is what draft-nachum-sarp sort of does (well, it defines another usage of Proxy ARP). Updating (or outlining some best practices for) Proxy ARP does not appear to be in-scope for any WG at the moment. I'm also not sure how much energy there would be for someone to take on such an activity (int-area arguably would be a fine home, were there energy). On the other hand, if we are seeing a renewed interested in using proxy ARP for DC stuff, and we start seeing additional submissions in this space, maybe the IETF should do something rather than have a bunch of individual submissions appear. Thomas From ghanwani@gmail.com Wed Apr 4 09:50:29 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE0A621F8751 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:50:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ieIaHPn2yyxp for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:50:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f54.google.com (mail-pz0-f54.google.com [209.85.210.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1448C21F8743 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:50:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by dady13 with SMTP id y13so683940dad.27 for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 09:50:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=uGl7nCQY+7jwgUyE86pVKm01Vq1bekD0F22JztcOvYw=; b=qA0kAv0UG8ud5p+6t6Hk2K3EIg72Kd7zya/63IVxyqrnv1+DyCW2yZb/WU7pI0hdWS ozqqdIyV5frjcfpTnatRGz9BGqorjck4IDJ6JnJv53FiWzEEvA4CeTVVRBahlTjtIExV YpdO1joTTNacdlameqUNUIud+QCSFxQ/PNymja+tH7IE66/ngFnX2ASvtnJD2qf9jlB9 oo+0Zn3ZgpSWWnvk8p3aZRyCGy9C2QJ5zLyhGhmWu9n2P1ivpWp0O5Scux9yRwwWtZvL 1GJ4X/AznVNFnujpZSZbjQmN3OaOEzYgZDChkw8mRbHjKMo2cGo0HxeFKS9LfgAjZbRO T2TA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.229.33 with SMTP id sn1mr39119536pbc.59.1333558228874; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 09:50:28 -0700 (PDT) Sender: ghanwani@gmail.com Received: by 10.143.5.20 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:50:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201204041519.q34FJCMA017432@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> References: <15B73861-C485-48F7-BB01-0F93BA0DB7AE@cisco.com> <201204041519.q34FJCMA017432@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:50:28 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: U01GXhqrQpk5xgjJ-StUa_0r3Z0 Message-ID: From: Anoop Ghanwani To: Thomas Narten Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b1601bb84f47304bcdd3855 Cc: armd@ietf.org Subject: Re: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp X-BeenThere: armd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 16:50:29 -0000 --047d7b1601bb84f47304bcdd3855 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Thomas Narten wrote: > > On the other hand, if we are seeing a renewed interested in using > proxy ARP for DC stuff, and we start seeing additional submissions in > this space, maybe the IETF should do something rather than have a > bunch of individual submissions appear. > > I think there was always interest in this problem. There were several solutions posted earlier (prior to ARMD being chartered), but since the charter excluded solutions, all of the solutions went away. We have at least 2 other proposals that I'm aware of: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/armd/current/msg00176.html http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shah-armd-arp-reduction It is possible that some of the work on directory-based address resolution/mapping will make having a solution in this space less important, but how that pans out and how well it scales, etc. is still to be seen. Anoop --047d7b1601bb84f47304bcdd3855 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> wrote:

On the other hand, if we are seeing a renewed interested in using
proxy ARP for DC stuff, and we start seeing additional submissions in
this space, maybe the IETF should do something rather than have a
bunch of individual submissions appear.


I think there was always interest in th= is problem. =A0There were several
solutions posted earlier (prior= to ARMD being chartered), but since
the charter excluded solutions, all of the solutions went away.
<= div>
We have at least 2 other proposals that I'm aware of= :

It is possible that some of the work on directory= -based=A0
address resolution/mapping will make having a solution<= /div>
in this space less important, but how that pans out and=A0
how well it scales, etc. is still to be seen.

Anoop
--047d7b1601bb84f47304bcdd3855-- From talmi@marvell.com Thu Apr 5 04:43:22 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3EA521F87A1 for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 04:43:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id euecEope3TZ7 for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 04:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from galiil.marvell.com (galiil.marvell.com [199.203.130.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7DF021F86E4 for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 04:43:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Tal Mizrahi To: Thomas Narten , Benson Schliesser , Youval Nachum Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 14:43:17 +0300 Thread-Topic: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp Thread-Index: Ac0SdySKH4ShMOp4SfK+zuhrwKZE1QAqFwXQ Message-ID: <74470498B659FA4687F0B0018C19A89C017E97383E99@IL-MB01.marvell.com> References: <15B73861-C485-48F7-BB01-0F93BA0DB7AE@cisco.com> <201204041519.q34FJCMA017432@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <201204041519.q34FJCMA017432@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "armd@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp X-BeenThere: armd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 11:43:23 -0000 Hi Thomas, >if we are seeing a renewed interested in using proxy ARP for DC stuff, and= we start seeing additional submissions in this space, maybe the IETF shoul= d do something rather than have a bunch of individual submissions appear Fully agree.=20 Indeed, the ARMD working group has had less energy lately, but we believe t= hat a WG that deals with ARMD solutions rather than ARMD problems will have= much more energy. Our default choice at this point is to proceed draft-nachum-sarp in the ind= ependent submission stream, however we would certainly like to see such a w= orking group and take part in it. Regards, Tal. -----Original Message----- From: armd-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:armd-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tho= mas Narten Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 6:19 PM To: Benson Schliesser Cc: armd@ietf.org Subject: Re: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp I just had a quick look at this document. It appears to me to be a combinat= ion of "learning" and "proxy ARP". IMO, it needs a bit more detail on some = aspects prior to publication, but that is a separate question. But, looking at draft-dunbar-armd-arp-nd-scaling-bcp-00.txt, it says: Recommendation: Revise RFC1027 with VLAN support and scalability for the Data Center Environment. I.e., update the Proxy ARP RFC. That is what draft-nachum-sarp sort of does= (well, it defines another usage of Proxy ARP). Updating (or outlining some best practices for) Proxy ARP does not appear t= o be in-scope for any WG at the moment. I'm also not sure how much energy t= here would be for someone to take on such an activity (int-area arguably wo= uld be a fine home, were there energy). On the other hand, if we are seeing a renewed interested in using proxy ARP= for DC stuff, and we start seeing additional submissions in this space, ma= ybe the IETF should do something rather than have a bunch of individual sub= missions appear. Thomas _______________________________________________ armd mailing list armd@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/armd From prvs=9450bd28b1=hshah@ciena.com Fri Apr 13 06:36:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AED1021F873D for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 06:36:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.264 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EfCYxCBzsBtN for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 06:36:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-00103a01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00103a01.pphosted.com [67.231.152.227]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5050421F8557 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 06:36:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0001124 [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00103a01.pphosted.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with SMTP id q3DDYqLc032711; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:36:06 -0400 Received: from mdwexght02.ciena.com (LIN1-118-36-29.ciena.com [63.118.36.29]) by mx0b-00103a01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 146j240fgm-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:36:05 -0400 Received: from MDWEXGMB02.ciena.com ([::1]) by MDWEXGHT02.ciena.com ([::1]) with mapi; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:36:04 -0400 From: "Shah, Himanshu" To: Anoop Ghanwani , Thomas Narten Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:36:03 -0400 Thread-Topic: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp Thread-Index: Ac0Sgw5RWwuA/nGwQkKo0eT2uKheZgG9kOMg Message-ID: References: <15B73861-C485-48F7-BB01-0F93BA0DB7AE@cisco.com> <201204041519.q34FJCMA017432@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.0.0.1412-6.800.1017-18834.007 x-tm-as-result: No--43.296500-8.000000-31 x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B37E6A2CE5957F4E83C1D9845A0FFE38B168B02FMDWEXGMB02ciena_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.6.7498, 1.0.260, 0.0.0000 definitions=2012-04-13_05:2012-04-13, 2012-04-13, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1203120001 definitions=main-1204130113 Cc: "armd@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp X-BeenThere: armd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 13:36:08 -0000 --_000_B37E6A2CE5957F4E83C1D9845A0FFE38B168B02FMDWEXGMB02ciena_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I agree with Anoop. We did find a healthy interest on 'arp-reduction' approach based on bang fo= r the bucks. Besides draft-shah-armd-arp-reduction predates draft-nachum-sarp... /himanshu From: armd-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:armd-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ano= op Ghanwani Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 12:50 PM To: Thomas Narten Cc: armd@ietf.org Subject: Re: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Thomas Narten > wrote: On the other hand, if we are seeing a renewed interested in using proxy ARP for DC stuff, and we start seeing additional submissions in this space, maybe the IETF should do something rather than have a bunch of individual submissions appear. I think there was always interest in this problem. There were several solutions posted earlier (prior to ARMD being chartered), but since the charter excluded solutions, all of the solutions went away. We have at least 2 other proposals that I'm aware of: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/armd/current/msg00176.html http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shah-armd-arp-reduction It is possible that some of the work on directory-based address resolution/mapping will make having a solution in this space less important, but how that pans out and how well it scales, etc. is still to be seen. Anoop --_000_B37E6A2CE5957F4E83C1D9845A0FFE38B168B02FMDWEXGMB02ciena_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I ag= ree with Anoop.

We= did find a healthy interest on ‘arp-reduction’ approach based = on bang for the bucks.

Besides draft-shah-armd-arp-reduction predates draft-nachum-sarp…=

 <= /span>

/himanshu

 

 

From: armd-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:armd-bounces@ietf.org] On= Behalf Of Anoop Ghanwani
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 12:= 50 PM
To: Thomas Narten
Cc: armd@ietf.org
Subject= : Re: [armd] draft-nachum-sarp

 


On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 a= t 8:19 AM, Thomas Narten <narten@us= .ibm.com> wrote:

On the other hand, if we are seeing a renewed interested in using
proxy= ARP for DC stuff, and we start seeing additional submissions in
this sp= ace, maybe the IETF should do something rather than have a
bunch of indi= vidual submissions appear.

 

I think there was= always interest in this problem.  There were several

solutions posted earlier (prior to ARMD being= chartered), but since

the ch= arter excluded solutions, all of the solutions went away.

 

We have at least 2 other proposals that I'm aware of:

=

 

It is possible that some of the work on directory-based <= /p>

address resolution/mapping will make hav= ing a solution

in this space = less important, but how that pans out and 

how well it scales, etc. is still to be seen.=

 

Anoop

= --_000_B37E6A2CE5957F4E83C1D9845A0FFE38B168B02FMDWEXGMB02ciena_-- From vhpc@crs4.it Tue Apr 24 02:43:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E5B721F876D for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 02:43:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.504 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.504 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_44=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0gV2J7ad028r for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 02:43:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from raffaello.crs4.it (raffaello.crs4.it [156.148.72.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC6A121F876A for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 02:43:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.crs4.it (smtp.crs4.it [156.148.18.19]) by raffaello.crs4.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB00179022F for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 11:43:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.crs4.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C25C397CA4 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:43:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: by lagj5 with SMTP id j5so370450lag.31 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 02:43:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.38.6 with SMTP id c6mr9291642lbk.106.1335260601728; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 02:43:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.64.10 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 02:43:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20120418-143425-emaillog135005@edas.info> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 11:43:21 +0200 Message-ID: From: Paolo Anedda To: armd@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e0cb4efe3584d93f6304be699587 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 07:37:25 -0700 Subject: [armd] [VHPC '12] CfP 7th Workshop on Virtualization in High-Performance Cloud Computing (VHPC'12) X-BeenThere: armd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:59:57 -0000 --e0cb4efe3584d93f6304be699587 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear Mailing List Members, please find the CfP for this year's VHPC taking place on Rhodes Island, Greece attached. We are looking forward to your abstract/paper submission. Best Regards, Michael Alexander, Gianluigi Zanetti and Anastassios Nanos VHPC'12 Chairs =================================================================== CALL FOR PAPERS 7th Workshop on Virtualization in High-Performance Cloud Computing VHPC '12 as part of Euro-Par 2012, Rhodes Island, Greece =================================================================== Date: August 28, 2012 Workshop URL: http://vhpc.org SUBMISSION DEADLINE: Rolling abstract submission June 4, 2012 - Full paper submission SCOPE: Virtualization has become a common abstraction layer in modern data centers, enabling resource owners to manage complex infrastructure independently of their applications. Conjointly, virtualization is becoming a driving technology for a manifold of industry grade IT services. The cloud concept includes the notion of a separation between resource owners and users, adding services such as hosted application frameworks and queueing. Utilizing the same infrastructure, clouds carry significant potential for use in high-performance scientific computing. The ability of clouds to provide for requests and releases of vast computing resources dynamically and close to the marginal cost of providing the services is unprecedented in the history of scientific and commercial computing. Distributed computing concepts that leverage federated resource access are popular within the grid community, but have not seen previously desired deployed levels so far. Also, many of the scientific data centers have not adopted virtualization or cloud concepts yet. This workshop aims to bring together industrial providers with the scientific community in order to foster discussion, collaboration and mutual exchange of knowledge and experience. The workshop will be one day in length, composed of 20 min paper presentations, each followed by 10 min discussion sections. Presentations may be accompanied by interactive demonstrations. TOPICS Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: Higher-level cloud architectures, focusing on issues such as: - Languages for describing highly-distributed compute jobs - Workload characterization for VM-based environments - Optimized communication libraries/protocols in the cloud - Cross-layer optimization of numeric algorithms on VM infrastructure - System and process/bytecode VM convergence - Cloud frameworks and API sets - Checkpointing/migration of large compute jobs - Instrumentation interfaces and languages - VMM performance (auto-)tuning on various load types - Cloud reliability, fault-tolerance, and security - Software as a Service (SaaS) architectures - Research and education use cases - Virtualization in cloud, cluster and grid environments - Cross-layer VM optimizations - Cloud use cases including optimizations - VM-based cloud performance modelling - Performance and cost modelling Lower-level design challenges for Hypervisors, VM-aware I/O devices, hardware accelerators or filesystems in VM environments, especially: - Cloud, grid and distributed filesystems - Hardware for I/O virtualization (storage/network/accelerators) - Storage and network I/O subsystems in virtualized environments - Novel software approaches to I/O virtualization - Paravirtualized I/O subsystems for modified/unmodified guests - Virtualization-aware cluster interconnects - Direct device assignment - NUMA-aware subsystems in virtualized environments - Hardware Accelerators in virtualization (GPUs/FPGAs) - Hardware extensions for virtualization - VMMs/Hypervisors for embedded systems Data Center management methods, including: - QoS and and service levels - VM cloud and cluster distribution algorithms - VM load-balancing in Clouds - Hypervisor extensions and tools for cluster and grid computing - Fault tolerant VM environments - Virtual machine monitor platforms - Management, deployment and monitoring of VM-based environments - Cluster provisioning in the Cloud PAPER SUBMISSION Papers submitted to the workshop will be reviewed by at least two members of the program committee and external reviewers. Submissions should include abstract, key words, the e-mail address of the corresponding author, and must not exceed 10 pages, including tables and figures at a main font size no smaller than 11 point. Submission of a paper should be regarded as a commitment that, should the paper be accepted, at least one of the authors will register and attend the conference to present the work. Accepted papers will be published in the Springer LNCS series - the format must be according to the Springer LNCS Style. Initial submissions are in PDF; authors of accepted papers will be requested to provide source files. Format Guidelines: http://www.springer.de/comp/lncs/authors.html Style template: ftp://ftp.springer.de/pub/tex/latex/llncs/latex2e/llncs2e.zip Abstract Submission Link: http://edas.info/newPaper.php?c=11943 IMPORTANT DATES Rolling abstract submission June 4, 2012 - Full paper submission June 29, 2012 - Acceptance notification July 20, 2012 - Camera-ready version due August 28, 2012 - Workshop Date CHAIR Michael Alexander (chair), TU Wien, Austria Gianluigi Zanetti (co-chair), CRS4, Italy Anastassios Nanos (co-chair), NTUA, Greece PROGRAM COMMITTEE Paolo Anedda, CRS4, Italy Giovanni Busonera, CRS4, Italy Brad Calder, Microsoft, USA Roberto Canonico, University of Napoli Federico II, Italy Tommaso Cucinotta, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Italy Werner Fischer, Thomas-Krenn AG, Germany William Gardner, University of Guelph, USA Marcus Hardt, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Germany Sverre Jarp, CERN, Switzerland Shantenu Jha, Louisiana State University, USA Xuxian Jiang, NC State, USA Nectarios Koziris, National Technical University of Athens, Greece Simone Leo, CRS4, Italy Ignacio Llorente, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain Naoya Maruyama, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan Jean-Marc Menaud, Ecole des Mines de Nantes, France Dimitrios Nikolopoulos, Foundation for Research&Technology Hellas, Greece Jose Renato Santos, HP Labs, USA Walter Schwaiger, TU Wien, Austria Yoshio Turner, HP Labs, USA Kurt Tutschku, University of Vienna, Austria Lizhe Wang, Indiana University, USA Chao-Tung Yang, Tunghai University, Taiwan DURATION: Workshop Duration is one day. GENERAL INFORMATION The workshop will be held as part of Euro-Par 2012. Euro-Par 2012: http://europar2012.cti.gr/ --e0cb4efe3584d93f6304be699587 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Mailing List Members,

please find the CfP for this year's VHPC taking place on Rhodes Island,= Greece attached. We are looking forward to your abstract/paper submission.=

Best Regards,

Michael Alexander, Gianluigi Zanetti and Anastassios Nanos
VHPC'12 Chairs


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

CALL FOR PAPERS

7th Workshop on

Virtualization in High-Performance Cloud Computing

VHPC '12

as part of Euro-Par 2012, Rhodes Island, Greece

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Date: August 28, 2012

Workshop URL: http://vhpc.org=

SUBMISSION DEADLINE:

Rolling abstract submission
June 4, 2012 - Full paper submission


SCOPE:

Virtualization has become a common abstraction layer in modern
data centers, enabling resource owners to manage complex
infrastructure independently of their applications. Conjointly,
virtualization is becoming a driving technology for a manifold of
industry grade IT services. The cloud concept includes the notion
of a separation between resource owners and users, adding =A0services
such as hosted application frameworks and queueing. Utilizing the
same infrastructure, clouds carry significant potential for use in
high-performance scientific computing. The ability of clouds to provide
for requests and releases of vast computing resources dynamically and
close to the marginal cost of providing the services is unprecedented in the history of scientific and commercial computing.

Distributed computing concepts that leverage federated resource
access are popular within the grid community, but have not seen
previously desired deployed levels so far. Also, many of the scientific
data centers have not adopted virtualization or cloud concepts yet.

This workshop aims to bring together industrial providers with the
scientific community in order to foster discussion, collaboration
and mutual exchange of knowledge and experience.

The workshop will be one day in length, composed of 20 min
paper presentations, each followed by 10 min discussion sections.
Presentations may be accompanied by interactive demonstrations.


TOPICS

Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

Higher-level cloud architectures, focusing on issues such as:
- Languages for describing highly-distributed compute jobs
- Workload characterization for VM-based environments
- Optimized communication libraries/protocols in the cloud
- Cross-layer optimization of numeric algorithms on VM infrastructure
- System and process/bytecode VM convergence
- Cloud frameworks and API sets
- Checkpointing/migration of large compute jobs
- Instrumentation interfaces and languages
- VMM performance (auto-)tuning on various load types
- Cloud reliability, fault-tolerance, and security
- Software as a Service (SaaS) architectures
- Research and education use cases
- Virtualization in cloud, cluster and grid environments
- Cross-layer VM optimizations
- Cloud use cases including optimizations
- VM-based cloud performance modelling
- Performance and cost modelling

Lower-level design challenges for Hypervisors, VM-aware I/O devices,
hardware accelerators or filesystems in VM environments, especially:
- Cloud, grid and distributed filesystems
- Hardware for I/O virtualization (storage/network/accelerators)
- Storage and network I/O subsystems in virtualized environments
- Novel software approaches to I/O virtualization
- Paravirtualized I/O subsystems for modified/unmodified guests
- Virtualization-aware cluster interconnects
- Direct device assignment
- NUMA-aware subsystems in virtualized environments
- Hardware Accelerators in virtualization (GPUs/FPGAs)
- Hardware extensions for virtualization
- VMMs/Hypervisors for embedded systems

Data Center management methods, including:
- QoS and and service levels
- VM cloud and cluster distribution algorithms
- VM load-balancing in Clouds
- Hypervisor extensions and tools for cluster and grid computing
- Fault tolerant VM environments
- Virtual machine monitor platforms
- Management, deployment and monitoring of VM-based environments
- Cluster provisioning in the Cloud


PAPER SUBMISSION

Papers submitted to the workshop will be reviewed by at least two
members of the program committee and external reviewers. Submissions
should include abstract, key words, the e-mail address of the
corresponding author, and must not exceed 10 pages, including tables
and figures at a main font size no smaller than 11 point. Submission
of a paper should be regarded as a commitment that, should the paper
be accepted, at least one of the authors will register and attend the
conference to present the work.

Accepted papers will be published in the Springer LNCS series - the
format must be according to the Springer LNCS Style. Initial
submissions are in PDF; authors of accepted papers will be requested
to provide source files.

Format Guidelines: http://www.springer.de/comp/lncs/authors.html
Style template:
ftp://ftp.springer.de/pub/tex/latex/llncs/latex2e/llncs2e.= zip
Abstract Submission Link: http://edas.info/newPaper.php?c=3D11943


IMPORTANT DATES

Rolling abstract submission
June 4, 2012 - Full paper submission
June 29, 2012 - Acceptance notification
July 20, 2012 - Camera-ready version due
August 28, 2012 - Workshop Date


CHAIR

Michael Alexander (chair), TU Wien, Austria
Gianluigi Zanetti (co-chair), CRS4, Italy
Anastassios Nanos (co-chair), NTUA, Greece


PROGRAM COMMITTEE

Paolo Anedda, CRS4, Italy
Giovanni Busonera, CRS4, Italy
Brad Calder, Microsoft, USA
Roberto Canonico, University of Napoli Federico II, Italy
Tommaso Cucinotta, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Italy
Werner Fischer, Thomas-Krenn AG, Germany
William Gardner, University of Guelph, USA
Marcus Hardt, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Germany
Sverre Jarp, CERN, Switzerland
Shantenu Jha, Louisiana State University, USA
Xuxian Jiang, NC State, USA
Nectarios Koziris, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Simone Leo, CRS4, Italy
Ignacio Llorente, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
Naoya Maruyama, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Jean-Marc Menaud, Ecole des Mines de Nantes, France
Dimitrios Nikolopoulos, Foundation for Research&Technology Hellas, Gree= ce
Jose Renato Santos, HP Labs, USA
Walter Schwaiger, TU Wien, Austria
Yoshio Turner, HP Labs, USA
Kurt Tutschku, University of Vienna, Austria
Lizhe Wang, Indiana University, USA
Chao-Tung Yang, Tunghai University, Taiwan


DURATION: Workshop Duration is one day.


GENERAL INFORMATION

The workshop will be held as part of Euro-Par 2012.

Euro-Par 2012: htt= p://europar2012.cti.gr/







--e0cb4efe3584d93f6304be699587-- From linda.dunbar@huawei.com Fri Apr 27 15:53:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46FF21E8034 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:53:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.238 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.238 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.360, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lDkg1ok4-drz for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:53:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A3E421E8027 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:53:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AFI68660; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:53:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:51:05 -0700 Received: from DFWEML505-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.100]) by dfweml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.151]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:50:32 -0700 From: Linda Dunbar To: "armd@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: 83rd IETF ARMD minutes Thread-Index: Ac0kyDRvfmfgy4hpRLmIRQOAMSLPZw== Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 22:51:03 +0000 Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F632E66056@dfweml505-mbx> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-cr-hashedpuzzle: EHSq EKAL Gr0p IM/W JSuC L4TV OHvT PCd7 PcZ4 Pso4 QrhA RO3B VOXU XRMB g6nl hBTj; 3; YQByAG0AZABAAGkAZQB0AGYALgBvAHIAZwA7AGIAcwBjAGgAbABpAGUAcwBAAGMAaQBzAGMAbwAuAGMAbwBtADsAcgBiAG8AbgBpAGMAYQBAAGoAdQBuAGkAcABlAHIALgBuAGUAdAA=; Sosha1_v1; 7; {A1094DF0-1860-4FAA-B679-D0A0070881D4}; bABpAG4AZABhAC4AZAB1AG4AYgBhAHIAQABoAHUAYQB3AGUAaQAuAGMAbwBtAA==; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 22:50:55 GMT;OAAzAHIAZAAgAEkARQBUAEYAIABBAFIATQBEACAAbQBpAG4AdQB0AGUAcwA= x-cr-puzzleid: {A1094DF0-1860-4FAA-B679-D0A0070881D4} x-originating-ip: [10.192.11.156] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F632E66056dfweml505mbx_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: [armd] 83rd IETF ARMD minutes X-BeenThere: armd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 22:53:41 -0000 --_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F632E66056dfweml505mbx_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks to Bert Wijnen for taking notes during 83rd IETF ARMD session. Here= is the minutes of the based on their notes. Please let us know if anything= being missing from the minutes. Cheers, Linda & Benson Time: 15:10pm ~16:10pm March 28, 2012 Chair: Linda Dunbar, Benson Schliesser Chairs presented Note Well Milestones by Benson The current deliverables run till Mar 2012. Two items were removed because not enough interest (the 2 Surveys). They ar= e considered done (removed from charter). Problem statement went through last call, but no comments. Chairs assume co= nsensus unless anyone objects. Thomas (author) objects and thinks we need at least 5 people to say YES I r= ead it and support it. AD (Ron) agrees. How many have read the current version? one of the co-auth= ors, and a few hands raised. But no-one on the lists said that they did. So need to ask WG mailing list. Thomas suggests nasty approach to ask people to commit to review. AD will b= ecome nastier if he does not see interest. Chair: who will review in 2 weeks? More than 5 committed. ARP/ND statistics draft. Need feed-back So shall we drop it? Unless someone objects strongly we will drop it. Will confirm at mailing list Recommendations draft (milestone Mar 2012) Will be presented GAP Analysis draft (milestone for MAr 2012) Someone MUST step up though. Presentation by Linda BCP for ARP/ND Scaling (SEE SLIDES) - SCENARIO 1 - SCENARIO 2 - Static Address Mapping - DNS Based Solution - ARP/ND Proxy Approaches - Overlay Network AD: Is the document BCP or Informational AD thinks Informational is the better choice So say David Black So say Igor Thomas agrees too Maybe we should just say "Current Practices". So do not use BCP acronym (or full) in the doc. WG chair: says charter states we must do a "recommendation". Does that not mean we need to do BCP? AD: NO Thomas: Be practical and don't get hung up on process WG chair: what does t= he WG want to do AD: SHOULD and MUST or should and must WG chair: I am not hearing feedback Linda: Is it more common to have a BCP or just a recommendation? Thomas sug= gests: Make sure at least 5 people have read it and think it should be a BC= P (actually it is not a WG draft yet). WG Chair: So we need to do some more work on this Thomas: put this WG out of its misery Get some people to commit and blame them if they do not deliver We must move quicker to be relevant Anoop(spelling?) : I think this is (still) an interesting problem WG chair = agrees. Just that the scope of the WG is limited to "problem" only. There i= s not much people can do. BUT we must do something or shut down. Benson: So this was the only item on agenda. Those who raised their hands, = please come to me so I can write down your name AD: The Gap Analysis and statistics doc have no author yet or have not show= n energy. Shall we just not do them and work on the items we do have activi= ty on? Chair: asks: shall we do that? Thomas: The GROUP does not seem to have the energy SO stop the docs that do not get the energy. Otherwise they may get referenced while they do not really have an= y standing Chair: So we not only need authors, but we need better content too Thomas: Seems we are not getting that content Chair: Does anyone disagree? Igor: I thought that we last time already agreed to kill this item. Chair: So we're going nowhere with this Thomas: The document as it is is based on simulation and not on real operational workload Igor agrees. As I said I thought we decided to kill it AD: Does anyone disagree with Thomas and Igor? No one disagrees Chair: so we do not do statistics and Gap analysis. So we have the "NOT BCP document" and the Problem statement So 10 have deci= ded to review the Problem statement since very few read the document... AD suggests: AD will sponsor the Problem statement and not-BCP document The= n shutdown the WG after this IETF. And all thanks for the good work Thomas: The WG (GROUP) OWES it to the authors to review these 2 documents s= o they can get published. WG chair: SO pls still come forward and give me your name. ANY last comments D channles xxxx Lots of the work we talked about shows up in NVO3, so that is the place to = redirect the energy to. Adjourned. --_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F632E66056dfweml505mbx_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks to Bert Wijnen for taking  notes during = 83rd IETF ARMD session. Here is the minutes of the based on thei= r notes. Please let us know if anything being missing from the minutes.

 

Cheers,

 

Linda & Benson

 <= /p>

Time: 15:10pm ~16:10pm March 28, 2012

Chair: Linda Dunbar, Benson Schliesser

Chairs presented Note Well

 

Milestones by Benson

The current deliverabl= es run till Mar 2012.

Two items were removed= because not enough interest (the 2 Surveys). They are considered done (rem= oved from charter).

Problem statement went= through last call, but no comments. Chairs assume consensus unless anyone = objects.

Thomas (author) object= s and thinks we need at least 5 people to say YES I read it and support it.

 

AD (Ron) agrees. How m= any have read the current version? one of the co-authors, and a few hands r= aised.

 

But no-one on the list= s said that they did. So need to ask WG mailing list.

 

Thomas suggests nasty = approach to ask people to commit to review. AD will become nastier if he do= es not see interest.

 

 Chair: who will = review in 2 weeks? More than 5 committed.

 

   ARP/ND statistics draft. Need feed-b= ack

   So shall we drop it?

   Unless someone objects strongly we w= ill drop it.

   Will confirm at mailing list

 

   Recommendations draft (milestone Mar= 2012)

   Will be presented

   GAP Analysis draft (milestone for MA= r 2012)

   Someone MUST step up though.

 

Presentation by Linda

   BCP for ARP/ND Scaling (SEE SLIDES)<= o:p>

   - SCENARIO 1

   - SCENARIO 2

   - Static Address Mapping<= /p>

   - DNS Based Solution

   - ARP/ND Proxy Approaches=

   - Overlay Network

 

AD: Is the document BCP or Informational

     AD thinks Informational = is the better choice

     So say David Black<= /o:p>

     So say Igor

     Thomas agrees too

     Maybe we should just say= "Current Practices".

     So do not use BCP acrony= m (or full) in the doc.

 

WG chair: says charter states we must do a "= recommendation".

    Does that not mean we need to = do BCP?

    AD: NO

Thomas: Be practical= and don’t get hung up on process WG chair: what does the WG want to = do

 

AD: SHOULD and MUST or should and must=

 

WG chair: I am not hearing feedback

Linda: Is it more common to have a BCP or just a = recommendation? Thomas suggests: Make sure at least 5 people have read it a= nd think it should be a BCP (actually it is not a WG draft yet).=

WG Chair: So we need to do some more work on this=

Thomas: put this WG out of its misery<= /p>

    Get some people to commit and = blame them if they do not deliver

    We must move quicker to be rel= evant

Anoop(spelling?) : I think this is (still) an int= eresting problem WG chair agrees. Just that the scope of the WG is limited = to “problem” only. There is not much people can do.

 BUT we must do something or shut down.=

 

 

 

Benson: So this was the only item on agenda. Thos= e who raised their hands, please come to me so I can write down your name

 

AD: The Gap Analysis and statistics doc have no a= uthor yet or have not shown energy. Shall we just not do them and work on t= he items we do have activity on?

 

Chair: asks: shall we do that?

Thomas: The GROUP does not seem to have the energ= y

         = SO stop the docs that do not get the energy.

        &= nbsp;Otherwise they may get referenced while they do not really have any st= anding

 

Chair: So we not only need authors, but we need b= etter content too

Thomas: Seems we are not getting that content

Chair: Does anyone disagree?

Igor: I thought that we last time already agreed = to kill this item.

Chair: So we're going nowhere with this

Thomas: The document as it is is based on simulat= ion and not on real

         = operational workload

Igor agrees. As I said I thought we decided to ki= ll it

AD: Does anyone disagree with Thomas and Igor?

No one disagrees

Chair: so we do not do statistics and Gap analysi= s.

So we have the "NOT BCP document" and t= he Problem statement So 10 have decided to review the Problem statement sin= ce very few read the document...

AD suggests: AD will sponsor the Problem statemen= t and not-BCP document Then shutdown the WG after this IETF. And all thanks= for the good work

Thomas: The WG (GROUP) OWES it to the authors to = review these 2 documents so they can get published.

WG chair: SO pls still come forward and give me y= our name.

 

 

ANY last comments

D channles xxxx

Lots of the work we talked about shows up in NVO3= , so that is the place to redirect the energy to.

 

Adjourned.

 

--_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F632E66056dfweml505mbx_-- From bschlies@cisco.com Fri Apr 27 16:19:32 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: armd@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 729CA21F86B2 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:19:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TP6g19y4QuT6 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:19:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-2.cisco.com (mtv-iport-2.cisco.com [173.36.130.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 568C621F86B1 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:19:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=bschlies@cisco.com; l=28583; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1335568771; x=1336778371; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id: references:to; bh=fWtyJPr698TT/64+vjQ0DDsI3GWOYmSe9EiaG66xA6A=; b=TaVJ2EARn+wTS3wqb6t7akOwIJKP8XDoyA/QgHbR/Tj7kVy98xKTAq1t CaN4lWU8vGbeHY1IjIKM+YJJ9t+VvO7QShvfmVkcAcZXwGioztI3UIZNj Ab9uwDwLIv4x3nIh4Vb7IQideOlWgq1D8lb0s2LcuHN40Q53CwJvngR7n 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAFYom0+rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABEgkavRYEHggkBAQEDARIBWwsFCws4AQ1XIhIHh2YEDJsKn3aLAoU4YwSIY4JkijaGYId3gWmDCIE0 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,493,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217";a="42571542" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by mtv-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Apr 2012 23:19:30 +0000 Received: from dhcp-171-71-147-193.cisco.com (dhcp-171-71-147-193.cisco.com [171.71.147.193]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q3RNJUg3024063; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 23:19:30 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-45-779285123 From: Benson Schliesser In-Reply-To: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F632E66056@dfweml505-mbx> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:19:30 -0700 Message-Id: <8E448648-58C1-45D1-8D57-48411ED5B365@cisco.com> References: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F632E66056@dfweml505-mbx> To: armd@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: Re: [armd] 83rd IETF ARMD minutes X-BeenThere: armd@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of issues associated with large amount of virtual machines being introduced in data centers and virtual hosts introduced by Cloud Computing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 23:19:32 -0000 --Apple-Mail-45-779285123 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Thanks to Bert and Linda for the notes. I've taken the liberty of = cleaning up the format, editing a few minor bits, and uploading the = result to http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/minutes/minutes-83-armd.txt = for your review. Please respond to the chairs and/or mailing list with any corrections by = 15-May-2012. Cheers, -Benson On Apr 27, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > Thanks to Bert Wijnen for taking notes during 83rd IETF ARMD session. = Here is the minutes of the based on their notes. Please let us know if = anything being missing from the minutes. > =20 > Cheers, > =20 > Linda & Benson > =20 > Time: 15:10pm ~16:10pm March 28, 2012 > Chair: Linda Dunbar, Benson Schliesser > Chairs presented Note Well > =20 > Milestones by Benson > The current deliverables run till Mar 2012. > Two items were removed because not enough interest (the 2 Surveys). = They are considered done (removed from charter). > Problem statement went through last call, but no comments. Chairs = assume consensus unless anyone objects. > Thomas (author) objects and thinks we need at least 5 people to say = YES I read it and support it. > =20 > AD (Ron) agrees. How many have read the current version? one of the = co-authors, and a few hands raised. > =20 > But no-one on the lists said that they did. So need to ask WG mailing = list. > =20 > Thomas suggests nasty approach to ask people to commit to review. AD = will become nastier if he does not see interest. > =20 > Chair: who will review in 2 weeks? More than 5 committed. > =20 > ARP/ND statistics draft. Need feed-back > So shall we drop it? > Unless someone objects strongly we will drop it. > Will confirm at mailing list > =20 > Recommendations draft (milestone Mar 2012) > Will be presented > GAP Analysis draft (milestone for MAr 2012) > Someone MUST step up though. > =20 > Presentation by Linda > BCP for ARP/ND Scaling (SEE SLIDES) > - SCENARIO 1 > - SCENARIO 2 > - Static Address Mapping > - DNS Based Solution > - ARP/ND Proxy Approaches > - Overlay Network > =20 > AD: Is the document BCP or Informational > AD thinks Informational is the better choice > So say David Black > So say Igor > Thomas agrees too > Maybe we should just say "Current Practices". > So do not use BCP acronym (or full) in the doc. > =20 > WG chair: says charter states we must do a "recommendation". > Does that not mean we need to do BCP? > AD: NO > Thomas: Be practical and don=92t get hung up on process WG chair: what = does the WG want to do > =20 > AD: SHOULD and MUST or should and must > =20 > WG chair: I am not hearing feedback > Linda: Is it more common to have a BCP or just a recommendation? = Thomas suggests: Make sure at least 5 people have read it and think it = should be a BCP (actually it is not a WG draft yet). > WG Chair: So we need to do some more work on this > Thomas: put this WG out of its misery > Get some people to commit and blame them if they do not deliver > We must move quicker to be relevant > Anoop(spelling?) : I think this is (still) an interesting problem WG = chair agrees. Just that the scope of the WG is limited to =93problem=94 = only. There is not much people can do. > BUT we must do something or shut down. > =20 > =20 > =20 > Benson: So this was the only item on agenda. Those who raised their = hands, please come to me so I can write down your name > =20 > AD: The Gap Analysis and statistics doc have no author yet or have not = shown energy. Shall we just not do them and work on the items we do have = activity on? > =20 > Chair: asks: shall we do that? > Thomas: The GROUP does not seem to have the energy > SO stop the docs that do not get the energy. > Otherwise they may get referenced while they do not really = have any standing > =20 > Chair: So we not only need authors, but we need better content too > Thomas: Seems we are not getting that content > Chair: Does anyone disagree? > Igor: I thought that we last time already agreed to kill this item. > Chair: So we're going nowhere with this > Thomas: The document as it is is based on simulation and not on real > operational workload > Igor agrees. As I said I thought we decided to kill it > AD: Does anyone disagree with Thomas and Igor? > No one disagrees > Chair: so we do not do statistics and Gap analysis. > So we have the "NOT BCP document" and the Problem statement So 10 have = decided to review the Problem statement since very few read the = document... > AD suggests: AD will sponsor the Problem statement and not-BCP = document Then shutdown the WG after this IETF. And all thanks for the = good work > Thomas: The WG (GROUP) OWES it to the authors to review these 2 = documents so they can get published. > WG chair: SO pls still come forward and give me your name. > =20 > =20 > ANY last comments > D channles xxxx > Lots of the work we talked about shows up in NVO3, so that is the = place to redirect the energy to. > =20 > Adjourned. > =20 --Apple-Mail-45-779285123 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Thanks to Bert and Linda for the notes. I've = taken the liberty of cleaning up the format, editing a few minor bits, = and uploading the result to ht= tp://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/minutes/minutes-83-armd.txt for = your review.

Please respond to the chairs = and/or mailing list with any corrections by = 15-May-2012.

Cheers,
-Benson
=

On Apr 27, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Linda Dunbar = wrote:

Thanks to Bert Wijnen for taking  notes during = 83rd IETF = ARMD session. Here is the minutes of the based on their notes. Please = let us know if anything being missing from the = minutes.
 
Cheers,
 
Linda & Benson
Time: 15:10pm ~16:10pm March = 28, 2012
Chair: Linda Dunbar, Benson = Schliesser
Chairs presented Note Well
Milestones by Benson
The = current deliverables run till Mar 2012.
Two = items were removed because not enough interest (the 2 Surveys). They are = considered done (removed from charter).
 
AD = (Ron) agrees. How many have read the current version? one of the = co-authors, and a few hands raised.
But no-one on the lists said that they did. So = need to ask WG mailing list.
 
 Chair: who will review in 2 weeks? More = than 5 committed.
 
   So shall we drop = it?
   Unless someone objects strongly we = will drop it.
   Will confirm at mailing = list
 
   Recommendations = draft (milestone Mar 2012)
   Will be = presented
   GAP Analysis draft (milestone for = MAr 2012)
   Someone MUST step up = though.
 
Presentation by = Linda
   BCP for ARP/ND Scaling (SEE = SLIDES)
   - SCENARIO 1
   - Static = Address Mapping
   - DNS Based = Solution
   - ARP/ND Proxy = Approaches
   - Overlay = Network
 
AD: Is the document BCP or = Informational
     AD thinks = Informational is the better choice
     So do not use BCP = acronym (or full) in the doc.
 
WG = chair: says charter states we must do a = "recommendation".
    Does that not mean = we need to do BCP?
    AD: = NO
Thomas: Be practical and = don=92t get hung up on process WG chair: what does the WG want to = do
AD: SHOULD and MUST or should and = must
 
WG chair: I am not hearing = feedback
Linda: Is it more common to have a BCP or just = a recommendation? Thomas suggests: Make sure at least 5 people have read = it and think it should be a BCP (actually it is not a WG draft = yet).
WG Chair: So we need to do some more work on = this
Thomas: put this WG out of its = misery
    Get some people to commit = and blame them if they do not deliver
Anoop(spelling?) : I think this is (still) an = interesting problem WG chair agrees. Just that the scope of the WG is = limited to =93problem=94 only. There is not much people can = do.
 BUT we must do something or shut = down.
 
 
Benson: So this was the only item on agenda. = Those who raised their hands, please come to me so I can write down your = name
 
AD: The Gap Analysis and = statistics doc have no author yet or have not shown energy. Shall we = just not do them and work on the items we do have activity = on?
 
Chair: asks: shall we do = that?
Thomas: The GROUP does not seem to have the = energy
 
Chair: So we not only need = authors, but we need better content too
Igor: I thought that we last = time already agreed to kill this item.
Igor agrees. As I said I thought we decided to = kill it
AD: Does anyone disagree with Thomas and = Igor?
No one disagrees
So we have the "NOT BCP document" and the = Problem statement So 10 have decided to review the Problem statement = since very few read the document...
AD = suggests: AD will sponsor the Problem statement and not-BCP document = Then shutdown the WG after this IETF. And all thanks for the good = work
Thomas: The WG (GROUP) OWES it to the authors = to review these 2 documents so they can get = published.
WG chair: SO pls still come forward and give me = your name.
 
 
ANY = last comments
D channles xxxx
Adjourned.
 

= --Apple-Mail-45-779285123--