Re: [vnrg] FlowVisor : A Network Virtualization Layer

[Martin Stiemerling <Martin.Stiemerling at neclab.eu>]

Rob,

You say:

> - network topologies that are independent of the physical topology
> (currently FlowVisor is restricted to subsets of the physical
> topology)

Does this also exclude right now the aggregation of multiple links to one virtual link?

Thanks,

  Martin

martin.stiemerling at neclab.eu

NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division
NEC Europe Limited | Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL | Registered in England 2832014 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: vnrg-bounces at irtf.org [mailto:vnrg-bounces at irtf.org] On Behalf Of
> Rob Sherwood
> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 6:00 PM
> To: Guillaume FORTAINE
> Cc: vnrg at irtf.org
> Subject: Re: [vnrg] FlowVisor : A Network Virtualization Layer
> 
> Hello,
> 
> 
> Apologies that I was not able to attend the working group meeting, but
> thanks for the interest on FlowVisor.  I flipped through the slides at
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/VNRG-0.pdf
> 
> and at least from the slides (I'm not sure how the
> presentation/discussion about these slides went) I think there might
> be a few things that need clarification:
> 
> In most of the flowvisor literature, we're very careful to describe
> this as "network *slicing*" as opposed to "network virtualization".
> The key differences (as brought out in the slides) is that current,
> FlowVisor does not support:
> 
> - two slices controlling the same virtual address space (e.g.,
> 10.0.0.0/24) but the flowvisor rewriting them to different physical
> addresses
> - network topologies that are independent of the physical topology
> (currently FlowVisor is restricted to subsets of the physical
> topology)
> 
> Both of these points are limits of the current implementation, but not
> of the design, and my thoughts for the future are to take FV towards
> implementing these points.
> 
> If anyone is interested in learning more about FlowVisor or its
> deployments as part of GENI, please let me know.
> 
> Thanks again for the interest,
> 
> - Rob
> .
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE
> <gfortaine at live.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > For your information :
> > -Flowvisor :
> > http://www.usenix.org/events/osdi/tech/slides/sherwood.pdf
> > http://www.deutsche-telekom-laboratories.de/~robert/flowvisor-
> osdi10.pdf
> > http://www.openflow.org/wk/index.php/FlowVisor
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Guillaume FORTAINE
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > vnrg mailing list
> > vnrg at irtf.org
> > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/vnrg
> >
> _______________________________________________
> vnrg mailing list
> vnrg at irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/vnrg