Re: [vnrg] Towards a Virtual Network definition

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Roland Bless <roland.bless at kit.edu> wrote:

Protocols running _inside_ the virtual topology are
typically layer 3 protocols, therefore we speak of
Network Virtualization (virtualization at the network layer,
and virtual nodes are thus virtual routers)

Are we sure about this? As a experimenter, I'd also be interested in virtualization of entities deeper in the layer, that is, virtualization of even L2 and L1.

'Network' we're talking about here would not merely mean 'Network Layer' in the OSI sense, but mean more of generic 'network' realm compassing from Physical upwards even up to Transport or beyond.

Question: does the host "belong" to the VNet topology or
not? IMHO, it is the same situation as in the Internet today:
hosts are part of the network but don't belong to an
ISPs infrastructure, i.e., they are attached to the
access routers/switches etc.

A host might be just one type of nodes in networking, i.e., stub node. A router, on the other hand might represent another type of node, i.e., a relay node.

With this notion, I'd think 'hosts' could also belong to the VNet topology.

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.