Hi Linda,

I'll add this to the agenda.

Thanks,
Yingzhen

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 8:37 AM Linda Dunbar <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Can we have 10 minutes to brief the following drafts?
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement/
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-gap-analysis/
>
>
>
> We have made significant changes to address the comment and suggestions
> from IETF106, email discussions and other IETF WGs.
>
> We have removed all reference to SD-WAN from those two drafts, making the
> drafts primarily focusing on the problems and gaps of networks to connect
> enterprise premises with hybrid cloud data centers.
>
>
>
> To make it easier for people to provide feedback, we added a Gap Summary
> section to draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-gap-analysis
>
>
>
> Here is the summary of the technical gaps discussed in this document:
>
> - For Accessing Cloud Resources
>
> a)            When a remote vCPE can be reached by multiple PEs of one
> provider VPN network, it is not straightforward to designate which egress
> PE to the remote vCPE based on applications
>
> b)            Need automated and reliable tools to map the user-friendly
> (natural language) access rules into machine readable policies and to
> provide interfaces for enterprises to self-manage policy enforcement points
> for their own workloads.
>
> c)            NAT Traversal. An enterprise’s network controller needs to
> be informed of the NAT properties for its workloads in Cloud DCs. If the
> workloads are attached to the enterprise’s own vCPEs instantiated in the
> Cloud DCs, the task can be achieved.
>
> d)            The multicast traffic to/from remote vCPE needs a feature
> like Appointed Forwarder specified by TRILL to prevent multicast data
> frames from looping around.
>
> e)            BGP between PEs and remote CPEs via untrusted networks.
>
> f)             Traffic Path Management
>
> - Overlay Edge Node’s WAN Port Management: BGP UPDATE propagate client’s
> routes information, but don’t distinguish network facing ports.
>
> - Aggregating VPN paths and Internet paths
>
> a)            Control Plane for Overlay over Heterogeneous Networks is not
> clear.
>
> b)            BGP UPDATE Messages missing properties:
>
> -              Lacking SD-WAN Segments Identifier
>
> -              Missing attributes in Tunnel-Encap
>
> c)            SECURE-L3VPN/EVPN is not enough
>
> d)            Missing clear methods in preventing attacks from
> Internet-facing ports
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> We are hoping for WGLC for the drafts.
>
> Linda Dunbar
>
>
>
> *From:* rtgwg <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of * Yingzhen Qu
> *Sent:* Monday, June 29, 2020 11:26 PM
> *To:* [email protected]; rtgwg-chairs <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* IETF 108 RTGWG Presentation Slot Requests
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> We're now accepting agenda request for the RTGWG Working Grouping meeting
> IETF 108. Please send your requests to [email protected]
> <[email protected]> indicating draft name, speaker, and desired
> duration (covering presentation and discussion).
>
>
>
> RTGWG session is scheduled on Tuesday, July 28th, 14:10-15:50 UTC.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Yingzhen
>
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to