[119312] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Layer 2 vs. Layer 3 to TOR
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stefan)
Fri Nov 13 09:30:03 2009
In-Reply-To: <m21vk2zh0n.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:29:16 -0600
From: Stefan <netfortius@gmail.com>
To: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Good point about Arista - Doug Gourlay, of [ex-]Cisco fame, is probably the
person to ask all possible questions about those solutions.
Cisco UCS is missing, also - looking at the Nexus deployment as ToR solution
(2K + 5K, even 1KV, considering the needs for virtualization, also) with all
benefits of both traditional ToR and E/MoR will definitely shed some light
in the debate on whether L3 in ToR makes any sense at all (e..g how would
you VMotion across racks?!? - how you you sync SANs across L3 in the DC
(tunnel?!?), etc.).
Here are some interesting articles associated with technologies in new DC
designs, for example, allowing some rethinking of the L3 question:
http://www.internetworkexpert.org/ - search for ToR and VMotion articles
(actually poke arond the whole blog - it is very good)
http://blogstu.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/fcoe-ecosystem/ (start from 1, of
course) ...etc.
***Stefan
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> i have seen no mention of arista as a tos switch/router, yet folk tell
> me it is one of the hottest on the block today. is there anyone who is
> actuallly using it who would care to report?
>
> randy
>
>
