1 / 6

PCP in VDP Reply

PCP in VDP Reply. Gu Yingjie ( guyingjie@huawei.com ) Bob Sultan ( bsultan@huawei.com ) Li Yizhou ( liyizhou@huawei.com ) Ben Mack-Crane ( tmackcrane@huawei.com ). Review of Physical Machine.

nell
Download Presentation

PCP in VDP Reply

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PCP in VDP Reply Gu Yingjie (guyingjie@huawei.com) Bob Sultan (bsultan@huawei.com) Li Yizhou (liyizhou@huawei.com) Ben Mack-Crane (tmackcrane@huawei.com)

  2. Review of Physical Machine • End-station could send C-tagged traffic or untagged traffic on port; We assume traffic as untagged; • Tagging performed per Port by Bridge • Priority value maybe tagged by Bridge server Bridge DA, SA, T/L, Payload DA, SA, CTAG[PCP=5, CFI=0, VID] T/L, Payload Server A Port X

  3. Model in EVB server bridge tagging entity • VM is aware of VSI as a port; • VMcould send C-tagged traffic on port but we assume traffic is untagged; • Tagging performed per VSI by ‘tagging entity’ under control of hypervisor; • could be Customer Edge Port of Edge Relay device; • PCP may also be tagged in traffic VM A VSI x DA, SA, T/L, Payload DA, SA, CTAG[PCP=5, VID] T/L, Payload DA, SA, T/L, Payload DA, SA, CTAG[PCP=3, VID] T/L, Payload VM B VSI y

  4. Hypervisor knowledge of PCP server bridge VDP req (VSI x TLV [PCP=null, VID=96]) • Hypervisor might maintain relationship between each VSI and corresponding value of PCP; or • PCP could be supplied by network, based on information in VSI-type; • PCP value supplied on VDP rsp; VDP rsp (VSI x TLV [PCP=5, VID=96]) hypervisor VDP req (VSI y TLV [PCP=null, VID=114]) VDP rsp (VSI y TLV [PCP=3, VID=114]) VM A VSI x DA, SA, T/L, Payload DA, SA, CTAG[5, 96] T/L, Payload DA, SA, T/L, Payload DA, SA, CTAG[3, 114] T/L, Payload VM B VSI y

  5. Proposal • VDP reserves 2 octets for VID which occupies only 12bits; • PCP proposal requires no additional field, it could be carried in the rest 4bits in VID field;

  6. Proposal P/V (2 octets) • Communicate 3-bit of PCP value on VDP rsp to aid; • 1-bit PCP Significant (PS) distinguishes PCP = 0 from PCP not specified; • Use high-order bits already reserved in VID field of VDP TLVs; • If more than one Filter Info Entry then • PCP specified by first (or last) entry with PS = true; or • PCP specified distinctly for each VID with PS = true; • no preference on this • Applicable to all four currently defined VDP TLV formats (only one illustrated above); • Current ‘VID’ field of VDP TLV changed to PV (PCP/VID); • did not want to choose TCI since the information contained is not identical to TCI. PS PCP VID 1 bit: 0 4

More Related