wdiff rfc8151.original rfc8151.txt

Network Working Group
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Yong
Internet Draft
Request for Comments: 8151 L. Dunbar
Category: Informational Huawei
ISSN: 2070-1721 M. Toy
Verizon
A. Isaac
Juniper Networks
V. Manral
Ionos Networks

Expires: July 2017 February 20,
Nano Sec Co
May 2017

Use Cases for Data Center Network Virtualization Overlay Networks

draft-ietf-nvo3-use-case-17

Abstract

This document describes data center network virtualization overlay Network Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) network
use cases that can be deployed in various data centers and serve
different data center data-center applications.

Status of this This Memo

This Internet-Draft document is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.

This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum
(IETF). It represents the consensus of six
months the IETF community. It has
received public review and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted has been approved for publication by other the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents
at
approved by the IESG are a candidate for any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

The list level of Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.

Information about the current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

The list status of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be accessed obtained at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

This Internet-Draft will expire on July 21, 2017.
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8151.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction...................................................3 Introduction ....................................................3
1.1. Terminology...............................................4 Terminology ................................................4
1.2. NVO3 Background...........................................5 Background ............................................5
2. DC with a Large Number of Virtual Networks.......................6 Networks ......................6
3. DC NVO3 virtual network Virtual Network and External Network Interconnection...6 Interconnection ....6
3.1. DC NVO3 virtual network Virtual Network Access via the Internet...........7 Internet ............7
3.2. DC NVO3 virtual network Virtual Network and SP WAN VPN Interconnection....8 Interconnection .....8
4. DC Applications Using NVO3.....................................9 NVO3 ......................................9
4.1. Supporting Multiple Technologies..........................9 Technologies ...........................9
4.2. DC Applications Spanning Multiple Physical Zones.........10 Zones ..........10
4.3. Virtual Data Center (vDC)................................10 (vDC) .................................10
5. Summary.......................................................12 Summary ........................................................12
6. Security Considerations.......................................12 Considerations ........................................12
7. IANA Considerations...........................................13 Considerations ............................................12
8. Informative References........................................13
Contributors.....................................................14
Acknowledgements.................................................14 References .........................................13
Acknowledgements...................................................14
Contributors ......................................................15
Authors' Addresses...............................................15 Addresses.................................................16

1. Introduction

Server virtualization has changed the Information Technology (IT)
industry in terms of the efficiency, cost, and speed of providing new
applications and/or services such as cloud applications. However However,
traditional data center (DC) networks have limits in supporting cloud
applications and multi tenant multi-tenant networks [RFC7364]. The goals goal of data
center network virtualization overlay Network Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) networks are is to
decouple the communication among tenant systems from DC physical
infrastructure networks and to allow one physical network
infrastructure to:

o Carry carry many NVO3 virtual networks and isolate the traffic of
different NVO3 virtual networks on a physical network.

o Provide provide independent address space in individual NVO3 virtual
network such as MAC Media Access Control (MAC) and IP.

o Support flexible Virtual Machines (VM) (VMs) and/or workload placement
including the ability to move them from one server to another
without requiring VM address changes and physical infrastructure
network configuration changes, and the ability to perform a "hot
move" with no disruption to the live application running on those
VMs.

These characteristics of NVO3 virtual networks (VNs) help address the
issues that cloud applications face in data centers [RFC7364].

Hosts in one NVO3 virtual network VN may communicate with hosts in another NVO3 virtual network VN
that is carried by the same physical network, or different physical
network, via a gateway. The use case use-case examples for the latter are: are as
follows:

1) DCs that migrate toward an NVO3 solution will be done in steps,
where a portion of tenant systems in a VN are on virtualized
servers while others exist on a LAN.

2) many DC applications serve to Internet users who are on different
physical networks;

3) some applications are CPU bound, such as Big Data analytics, and
may not run on virtualized resources.

The inter-
VN inter-VN policies are usually enforced by the gateway.

This document describes general NVO3 virtual network VN use cases that apply to
various data centers. The use cases described here represent the DC
provider's interests and vision for their cloud services. The
document groups the use cases into three categories from simple to sophiscated
sophisticated in terms of implementation. However However, the
implementation details of these use cases are outside the scope of
this document. These three categories are highlighted described below:

o Basic NVO3 virtual networks VNs (Section 2). All Tenant Systems (TS) (TSs) in the
network are located within the same DC. The individual networks
can be either Layer 2 (L2) or Layer 3 (L3). The number of NVO3 virtual networks
VNs in a DC is much larger than the number that traditional VLAN VLAN-
based virtual networks [IEEE 802.1Q] [IEEE802.1Q] can support.

o A virtual network that spans across multiple Data Centers DCs and/or to
customer premises where NVO3 virtual networks are constructed and
interconnect other virtual or physical networks outside the
data center. DC.
An enterprise customer may use a traditional carrier-grade VPN or
an IPsec tunnel over the Internet to communicate with its systems
in the DC. This is described in Section 3.

o DC applications or services require an advanced network that
contains several NVO3 virtual networks that are interconnected by
gateways. Three scenarios are described in Section 4. 4:
(1) supporting multiple technologies;
(2) constructing several virtual networks as a tenant network; and
(3) applying NVO3 to a virtual Data Center (vDC).

The document uses the architecture reference model defined in
[RFC7365] to describe the use cases.

1.1. Terminology

This document uses the terminology defined in [RFC7365] and
[RFC4364]. Some additional terms used in the document are listed
here.

ASBR: Autonomous System Border Routers (ASBR) Router.

DC: Data Center.

DMZ: Demilitarized Zone. A computer or small sub-network that sits subnetwork
between a more trusted more-trusted internal network, such as a
corporate private LAN, and an un-trusted untrusted or less trusted less-trusted
external network, such as the public Internet.

DNS: Domain Name Service [RFC1035] [RFC1035].

DC Operator: An entity that is responsible for constructing and
managing all resources in data centers, DCs, including, but not
limited to, compute, computing, storage, networking, etc.

DC Provider: An entity that uses its DC infrastructure to offer
services to its customers.

NAT: Network Address Translation [RFC3022] [RFC3022].

vGW: virtual Gateway; a GateWay. A gateway component used for an NVO3
virtual network to interconnect with another
virtual/physical network.

NVO3 virtual network: a

NVO3: Network Virtualization over Layer 3. A virtual network
that is implemented based on the NVO3 architecture [NVO3-ARCH]. architecture.

PE: Provider Edge Edge.

SP: Service Provider Provider.

TS: A TS Tenant System, which can be instantiated on a physical server/device
server or a virtual machine (VM)
on a server, i.e., end-device [RFC7365]. (VM).

VRF-LITE: Virtual Routing and Forwarding - LITE [VRF-LITE] [VRF-LITE].

VN: NVO3 virtual network. Virtual Network

VoIP: Voice over IP

WAN VPN: Wide Area Network Virtual Private Network [RFC4364]
[RFC7432]
[RFC7432].

1.2. NVO3 Background

An NVO3 virtual network is a virtual network in a DC that is implemented based on the NV03
NVO3 architecture [RFC8014]. This architecture is often referred to
as an overlay architecture. The traffic carried by an NVO3 virtual
network is encapsulated at a Network Virtual Virtualization Edge (NVE)
[RFC8014] and carried by a tunnel to another NVE where the traffic is
decapsulated and sent to a destination Tenant System (TS). The NVO3
architecture decouples NVO3 virtual networks from the DC physical
network configuration. The architecture uses common tunnels to carry
NVO3 traffic that belongs to multiple NVO3 virtual networks.

An NVO3 virtual network may be an L2 or L3 domain. The network
provides switching (L2) or routing (L3) capability to support host
(i.e., tenant systems) TS) communications. An NVO3 virtual network may be required
to carry unicast traffic and/or multicast,
broadcast/unknown-unicast multicast or broadcast/unknown-
unicast (for L2 only) traffic from/to tenant
systems. to/from TSs. There are several ways to
transport NVO3 virtual network
BUM (Broadcast, Unknown-unicast, Multicast) Broadcast, Unknown Unicast, and
Multicast (BUM) traffic [NVO3MCAST].

An NVO3 virtual network provides communications among Tenant Systems
(TS) TSs in a DC. A
TS can be a physical server/device or a virtual
machine (VM) VM on a server end-device
[RFC7365].

2. DC with a Large Number of Virtual Networks

A DC provider often uses NVO3 virtual networks for internal
applications where each application runs on many VMs or physical
servers and the provider requires applications to be segregated from
each other. A DC may run a larger number of NVO3 virtual networks to
support many applications concurrently, where a traditional IEEE802.1Q
based VLAN
solution based on IEEE 802.1Q is limited to 4094 VLANs.

Applications running on VMs may require a different quantity of
computing resource, resources, which may result in computing resource a computing-resource
shortage on some servers and other servers being nearly idle. Shortage A
shortage of computing resource resources may impact application performance.
DC operators desire VM or workload movement for resource usage resource-usage
optimization. VM dynamic placement and mobility results in frequent
changes of the binding between a TS and an NVE. The TS reachability
update mechanisms should take significantly less time than the
typical re-
transmission Time-out retransmission Timeout window of a reliable transport
protocol such as TCP and SCTP, Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP),
so that end points' endpoints' transport connections won't be impacted by a TS
becoming bound to a different NVE. The capability of supporting many
TSs in a virtual network and many virtual networks in a DC is
critical for an NVO3 solution.

When NVO3 virtual networks segregate VMs belonging to different
applications, DC operators can independently assign MAC and/or IP
address space to each virtual network. This addressing is more
flexible than requiring all hosts in all NVO3 virtual networks to
share one address space. In contrast, typical use of IEEE 802.1Q
VLANs requires a single common MAC address space.

3. DC NVO3 virtual network Virtual Network and External Network Interconnection

Many customers (enterprises or individuals) who utilize a DC
provider's compute and storage resources to run their applications
need to access their systems hosted in a DC through Internet or
Service Providers' Wide Area Networks (WAN). A DC provider can
construct a NVO3 virtual network that provides connectivity to all
the resources designated for a customer customer, and it allows the customer
to access the resources via a virtual gateway GateWay (vGW). WAN
connectivity to the virtual gateway vGW can be provided by VPN technologies such as
IPsec VPNs [RFC4301] and BGP/MPLS IP VPNs [RFC 4364]. [RFC4364].

If a virtual network spans multiple DC sites, one design using NVO3
is to allow the network to seamlessly span the sites without DC
gateway routers' termination. In this case, the tunnel between a
pair of NVEs can be carried within other intermediate tunnels over
the Internet or other WANs, or an intra-DC tunnel and inter DC inter-DC
tunnel(s) can be stitched together to form an end-to-end tunnel
between the pair of NVEs that are in different DC sites. Both cases
will form one NVO3 virtual network across multiple DC sites.

Two use cases are described in the following sections.

3.1. DC NVO3 virtual network Virtual Network Access via the Internet

A customer can connect to an NVO3 virtual network via the Internet in
a secure way. Figure 1 illustrates an example of this case. The
NVO3 virtual network has an instance at NVE1 and NVE2 NVE2, and the two
NVEs are connected via an IP tunnel in the Data Center. DC. A set of
tenant systems TSs are
attached to NVE1 on a server. NVE2 resides on a DC Gateway device.
NVE2 terminates the tunnel and uses the VNID VN Identifier (VNID) on the
packet to pass the packet to the corresponding vGW entity on the DC
GW (the vGW is the default gateway for the virtual network). A
customer can access their systems, i.e., TS1 or TSn, in the DC via
the Internet by using an IPsec tunnel [RFC4301]. The IPsec tunnel is
configured between the vGW and the customer gateway at the customer
site. Either a static route or Interior Internal Border Gateway Protocol
(iBGP)
(IBGP) may be used for prefix advertisement. The vGW provides IPsec
functionality such as authentication scheme and encryption; iBGP
protocol IBGP
traffic is carried within the IPsec tunnel. Some vGW features are
listed below:

o The vGW maintains the TS/NVE mappings and advertises the TS prefix
to the customer via static route or iBGP. IBGP.

o Some vGW functions such as the firewall and load balancer load-balancer (LB) can
be performed by locally attached network appliance devices.

o If the NVO3 virtual network uses different address space than
external users, then the vGW needs to provide the NAT function.

o More than one IPsec tunnel can be configured for redundancy.

o 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.

o 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 - 1: DC Virtual Network Access via the Internet

3.2. DC NVO3 virtual network Virtual Network and SP WAN VPN Interconnection

In this case, an Enterprise 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 Service Provider SP constructs a VPN for the
enterprise customer. Each enterprise site peers with an SP PE. The
DC Provider provider and VPN Service Provider SP can build an NVO3 virtual network and a WAN
VPN independently, and then interconnect them via a local link, link or a
tunnel between the DC GW and WAN
Provider Edge (PE) PE devices. The control plane
interconnection options between the DC and WAN are described in
[RFC4364]. Using the option A "a" specified in [RFC4364] with VRF-LITE
[VRF-LITE], both
Autonomous System Border Routers (ASBR), ASBRs, i.e., DC GW and SP PE, maintain a
routing/forwarding table (VRF). Using the option B "b" specified in
[RFC4364], the DC ASBR and SP ASBR do not maintain the VRF table;
they only maintain the NVO3 virtual network and VPN identifier
mappings, i.e., label mapping, and swap the label on the packets in
the forwarding process. Both option A "a" and B option "b" allow the se
of NVO3 virtual network VNs and VPN VPNs using their own identifiers identifiers, and two identifiers
are mapped at the DC GW. With the option C "c" in [RFC4364], the VN
and VPN use the same identifier and both ASBRs perform the tunnel
stitching, i.e., tunnel segment mapping. Each option has pros/cons pros and
cons [RFC4364] and has been deployed in SP networks depending on the
application requirements. BGP is used in these options for route
distribution between DCs and SP WANs. Note that if the DC is the
SP's Data Center, DC, the DC GW and SP PE in this case can be merged into one device that
performs the interworking of the VN and VPN within an AS. Autonomous
System.

These solutions allow the enterprise networks to communicate with the
tenant systems attached to the NVO3 virtual network in the DC without
interfering with the DC provider's underlying physical networks and
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 the location of the VMs in the DC. (See
Section 4 for more) more information.)

Furthermore, in this use case, the DC operator can move the VMs
assigned to the enterprise from one sever to another in the DC
without the enterprise customer being aware, i.e., with no impact on
the enterprise's 'live' "live" applications. Such advanced technologies
bring DC providers great benefits in offering cloud services, but add
some requirements for NVO3 [RFC7364] as well.

4. DC Applications Using NVO3

NVO3 technology provides DC operators with the flexibility in
designing and deploying different applications in an end-to-end
virtualization overlay environment. The operators no longer need to
worry about the constraints of the DC physical network configuration
when creating VMs and configuring a network to connect them. A DC
provider may use NVO3 in various ways, in conjunction with other
physical networks and/or virtual networks in the DC. This section
highlights some use cases for this goal.

4.1. Supporting Multiple Technologies

Servers deployed in a large data center DC are often installed at different
times, and they may have different capabilities/features. Some
servers may be virtualized, while others may not; some may be
equipped with virtual switches, while others may not. For the
servers equipped 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. VxLAN [RFC7348], NVGRE (e.g., Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN)
[RFC7348] and Network Virtualization using Generic Routing
Encapsulation (NVGRE) [RFC7637]) or proprietary encapsulations. To
construct a tenant network among these servers and the ToR Top-of-Rack
(ToR) switches, operators can construct one traditional VLAN network
and two virtual networks where one uses VxLAN VXLAN encapsulation and the
other uses NVGRE, and interconnect these three networks via a gateway
or virtual GW. The GW performs packet encapsulation/decapsulation
translation between the networks.

Another case is that some software of a tenant has high CPU and
memory consumption, which only makes a sense to run on standalone
servers; other software of the tenant may be good to run on VMs.
However
However, provider DC infrastructure is configured to use NVO3 to
connect VMs and VLAN VLANs [IEEE802.1Q] to physical servers. The tenant
network requires interworking between NVO3 and traditional VLAN.

4.2. DC Applications Spanning Multiple Physical Zones

A DC can be partitioned into multiple physical zones, with each zone
having different access permissions and runs 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 are only
able to communicate with the Web application in the front zone; 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
DMZ zone can be used to between two NVO3 virtual networks, i.e., two
zones. If network functions (NF), (NFs), especially the security functions
in the physical DMZ DMZ, can't process encapsulated NVO3 traffic, the
NVO3 tunnels have to be terminated for the NF to perform its
processing on the application traffic.

4.3. Virtual Data Center (vDC)

An enterprise data center today DC may deploy routers, switches, and network appliance
devices to construct its internal network, DMZ, and external network
access; it may have many servers and storage running various
applications. With NVO3 technology, a DC Provider provider can construct a virtual Data Center (vDC)
vDC over its physical DC infrastructure and offer a virtual Data Center vDC service to
enterprise customers. A vDC at the DC Provider provider site provides the
same capability as the physical DC at a customer site. A customer
manages its own applications running in its vDC. A DC Provider provider can
further offer different network service functions to the customer.
The network service functions may include a firewall, DNS, load balancer, LB,
gateway, etc.

Figure 2 below illustrates one such scenario at the service
abstraction service-abstraction
level. In this example, the vDC contains several L2 VNs (L2VNx,
L2VNy, L2VNz) to group the tenant systems together on a per-
application basis, and one L3 VN (L3VNa) for the internal routing. A
network firewall and gateway runs on a VM or server that connects to
L3VNa and is used for inbound and outbound traffic processing. A
load balancer (LB) An LB
is used in L2VNx. A VPN is also built between the gateway and
enterprise router. An Enterprise customer runs Web/Mail/Voice
applications on VMs within the vDC. The users at the Enterprise site
access the applications running in the vDC via the VPN; Internet
users access these applications via the gateway/firewall at the provider 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.

Provider

DC Provider Site

Figure 2 - 2: Virtual Data Center Abstraction View

The enterprise customer decides which applications should be
accessible only via the intranet and which should be assessable via
both the intranet and Internet, and it configures the proper security
policy and gateway function at the firewall/gateway. Furthermore, an
enterprise customer may want multi-zones in a vDC (See section (see Section 4.2)
for the security and/or the ability to set different QoS levels for
the different applications.

The vDC use case requires an NVO3 solution to provide DC operators
with an easy and quick way to create an NVO3 virtual network and NVEs
for any vDC design, to allocate TSs and assign TSs to the
corresponding NVO3 virtual network, network and to illustrate vDC topology and
manage/configure individual elements in the vDC in a secure way.

5. Summary

This document describes some general NVO3 use cases in DCs. The
combination of these cases will give operators the flexibility and
capability to design more sophisticated support for various cloud
applications.

DC services may vary, NVO3 virtual networks make it possible to scale
a large number of virtual networks in a DC and ensure the network
infrastructure not impacted by the number of VMs and dynamic workload
changes in a DC.

NVO3 uses tunnel techniques to deliver NVO3 traffic over DC physical
infrastructure network. A tunnel encapsulation protocol is
necessary. An NVO3 tunnel may may, in turn turn, be tunneled over other
intermediate tunnels over the Internet or other WANs.

An NVO3 virtual network in a DC may be accessed by external users in
a secure way. Many existing technologies can help achieve this.

6. Security Considerations

Security is a concern. DC operators need to provide a tenant with a
secured virtual network, which means one tenant's traffic is isolated
from other tenants' traffic and is not leaked to the underlay
networks. Tenants are vulnerable to observation and data
modification/injection by the operator of the underlay and should
only use operators they trust. DC operators also need to prevent a
tenant application attacking their underlay DC network; networks; further,
they need to protect a tenant application attacking another tenant
application via the DC infrastructure network. For example, a tenant
application attempts to generate a large volume of traffic to
overload the DC's underlying network. This can be done by limiting
the bandwidth of such communications.

7. IANA Considerations

This document does not request require any action from IANA. 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", Area Networks", IEEE Std 802.1Q, 2011.

[NIST] National Institute of Standards and Technology, "The NIST
Definition of Cloud Computing", SP 880-145, September,
2011.
802.1Q-2011, DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2011.6009146.

[NVO3MCAST] Ghanwani, A., Dunbar, L., et al, McBride, M., Bannai, V., and
R. Krishnan, "A Framework for Multicast in Network
Virtualization Overlays", draft-ietf-
nvo3-mcast-framework-05, work Work in progress. Progress,
draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-07, May 2016.

[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES "Domain names - Implementation implementation and
Specification", RFC1035,
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035,
DOI 10.17487/RFC1035, November 1987. 1987,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1035>.

[RFC3022] Srisuresh, P. and K. Egevang, K., "Traditional IP Network
Address Translator (Traditional NAT)", RFC3022, RFC 3022,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3022, January
2001. 2001,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3022>.

[RFC4301] Kent, S., S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", rfc4301, RFC 4301, DOI 10.17487/RFC4301,
December 2005 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. 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.

[RFC7348] Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., et al, 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",
RFC7348 RFC 7348,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014. 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7348>.

[RFC7364] Narten, T., et al Ed., Gray, E., Ed., Black, D., Fang, L.,
Kreeger, L., and M. Napierala, "Problem Statement:
Overlays for Network Virtualization", RFC7364, RFC 7364,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7364, October 2014. 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7364>.

[RFC7365] Lasserre, M., Motin, Balus, F., Morin, T., et al, Bitar, N., and Y.
Rekhter, "Framework for DC Data Center (DC) Network
Virtualization", RFC7365, RFC 7365, DOI 10.17487/RFC7365,
October 2014. 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7365>.

[RFC7432] Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A. and
J. A.,
Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS MPLS-
Based Ethernet VPN", RFC7432, RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432,
February 2015 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7432>.

[RFC7637] Garg, P., Ed., and Y. Wang, Y., Ed., "NVGRE: Network
Virtualization
using Using Generic Routing Encapsulation", RFC7637, Sept. 2015.
RFC 7637, DOI 10.17487/RFC7637, September 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7637>.

[RFC8014] Black, D., et al, Hudson, J., Kreeger, L., Lasserre, M., and
T. Narten, "An Architecture for Overlay Networks Data-Center Network
Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3)", rfc8014, January 2017. 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
<http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/
catalyst4500/12-2/31sg/configuration/guide/conf/
vrf.pdf>.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank 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 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 St, 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.net

Acknowledgements

Authors like to thank 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 the review, comments, and suggestions.

Authors' Addresses

Lucy Yong
Huawei Technologies
Phone: +1-918-808-1918
Email: lucy.yong@huawei.com

Linda Dunbar
Huawei Technologies,
5340 Legacy Dr. Drive
Plano, TX 75025 US
United States of America
Phone: +1-469-277-5840
Email: linda.dunbar@huawei.com

Mehmet Toy
Verizon

E-mail : mtoy054@yahoo.com
Email: mehmet.toy@verizon.com

Aldrin Isaac
Juniper Networks
E-mail:
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@ionosnetworks.com vishwas@nanosec.io