Category: Data Center

Continuing our bridging loops discussion Christoph Jaggi sent me another question:

Theoretically STP should avoid bridging loops, and yet you claim they cause data center meltdowns. What am I missing?

In theory, STP avoids bridging loops. In practice, there are numerous reasons STP got a bad name.

My friend Christoph Jaggi, the author of fantastic Metro Ethernet and Carrier Ethernet Encryptors documents, sent me this question when we were discussing the Data Center Fabrics Overview workshop I’ll run in Zurich in a few weeks:

When you are talking about large-scale VLAN-based fabrics I assume that you are pointing towards highly populated VLANs, such as VLANs containing 1000+ Ethernet addresses. Could you provide a tipping point between reasonably-sized VLANs and large-scale VLANs?

It's not the number of hosts in the VLAN but the span of a bridging domain (VLAN or otherwise).

A lot of people love to talk about ASICs and merchant silicon, but very few really understand the basics. Now there’s a quick way to fix that: watch the excellent Tech Field Day video with Dave Zacks from Cisco Systems.

Mr. A. Anonymous left this comment on my BGP in the data centers blog post:

BGP is starting to penetrate into servers as well. What are your thoughts on having BGP running from the servers themselves?

Finally some people got it. Also, welcome back to the '90s (see also RFC 1925 section 2.11).

A while ago someone posted a link to an article that links to LinkedIn’s blog post describing their switch-building efforts to the LinkedIn SDN group (how’s that for a circular reference?), and a consultant from Brocade felt compelled to share his wisdom with the world. Unfortunately he got most of the facts wrong.

One of the comments added to my Using BGP in Data Centers blog post said:

With symmetric fabric… does it make sense for a node to know every bit of fabric info or is reachability information sufficient?

Let’s ignore for the moment that large non-redundant layer-3 fabrics where BGP-in-Data-Center movement started don’t need more than endpoint reachability information, and focus on a bigger issue: is knowledge of network topology (as provided by OSPF and not by BGP) beneficial?

While the large data centers increasingly use BGP as the routing protocol within their fabrics, the enterprise engineers tend to shy away from that idea because they think BGP is too complex/scary/hard-to-configure/obsolete/unknown/whatever.

It’s time to fix that.

A few days ago Dell announced their next-generation network OS based on Debian Linux, and bloggers (like my good friend Tom Hollingsworth) started wondering what’s going to happen with Cumulus Linux.

Let’s get into prognostication mode…

A year and a half ago, Docker networking couldn’t span multiple hosts and used NAT with port mapping to expose container-based services to the outside world.

Docker is the hottest Linux container solution these days. Want to know more about it? Matt Oswalt is running Introduction to Docker webinar in a few days.

In August 2014 a small startup decided to change all that. Docker bought them before they managed to get public, and the rest is history.

Continuing the IPv6 address selection discussion we have a few days ago, Luka Manojlovič sent me a seemingly workable proposal:

I think we were discussing a borderline problem. In a server environment there won’t be any SLAAC, and we could turn off DHCPv6 client on servers with fixed IP addresses.

Sounds great, but as always, the reality tends to be a bit harsher.