The documentation set for this product strives to use bias-free language. For the purposes of this documentation set, bias-free is defined as language that does not imply discrimination based on age, disability, gender, racial identity, ethnic identity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and intersectionality. Exceptions may be present in the documentation due to language that is hardcoded in the user interfaces of the product software, language used based on RFP documentation, or language that is used by a referenced third-party product. Learn more about how Cisco is using Inclusive Language.
This chapter introduces the implementation of the Cisco VMDC 2.1 solution. For detailed design considerations relating to this architecture, refer to the Cisco Virtualized Multi-Tenant Data Center, Version 2.1, Design Guide.
The Cisco VMDC solution validation focused on the following features and technologies:
This section identifies the Cisco VMDC 2.1 design and testbed changes relative to VMDC 2.0.
Design Changes
•A new flexible tenancy model. The network tenancy definition and scope is not limited to application service availability. As a result, the tenant container is no longer characterized or referenced as Gold, Silver, or Bronze.
•Single aggregation VDC representing a single L2/L3 boundary for all compute/storage flows.
•DSN connected via L3 Port-Channel (MEC) with all routed services.
Additional Technology Validation
•Jumbo MTU validation.
•Multicast validation for PIM and IGMP.
Additional Product Validation
•Nexus 1010 Virtual Service Appliance
•Cisco NAM Virtual Service Blade capability validation.
The Cisco VMDC 2.1 infrastructure was validated and operationally compared at two different tenant scale points: 8 tenants and 32 tenants. Table 1-3 lists some of the main focus variables that were validated as part of the Cisco VMDC 2.1 architecture testing.
|
|
|
|
|
---|---|---|---|---|
Nexus 7010 |
VRF |
Each tenant requires 2 VRFs |
16 |
64 |
VLAN |
VLANs per tenant VRF |
48 |
192 |
|
MAC |
Total MAC addresses |
4,000 |
13,000 |
|
RIB |
Routes in unprotected zone |
328 |
1312 |
|
Routes in protected zone |
160 |
640 |
||
OSPF |
AFI |
16 |
64 |
|
Neighbor adjacencies in unprotected zone |
32 |
128 |
||
Neighbor adjacencies in protected zone |
16 |
64 |
||
Catalyst 6509 |
VRFs |
Each tenant requires 2 VRFs |
16 |
64 |
VLAN |
2 ACE VLANs / 2 FWSM VLANs |
32 |
128 |
|
RIB
|
Routes in unprotected zone |
208 |
832 |
|
Routes in protected zone |
104 |
416 |
||
OSPF
|
Processes |
16 |
64 |
|
Neighbor adjacencies |
32 |
128 |
||
ACE |
Context |
2 ACE contexts per Tenant |
16 |
64 |
VIPs |
4 VIPs per context (8 Tenant) |
32 |
— |
|
2 VIPs per context (32 Tenant) |
— |
64 |
||
FWSM |
Context |
1 FW context per tenant |
8 |
32 |
Nexus 5020 |
VLANs
|
3 Server VLANs per VRF |
48 |
192 |
Management VLANs |
8 |
8 |
||
NFS vFiler VLANs |
8 |
32 |
||
MAC |
Total MAC addresses |
4,000 |
13,000 |
|
Nexus 61xx |
VLANs
|
3 Server VLANs per VRF |
48 |
192 |
Management |
8 |
8 |
||
NFS vFiler VLANs |
8 |
32 |
||
MAC |
Total MAC addresses |
4,000 |
~13,000 |
|
Nexus 1000v |
VLANs
|
3 Server VLANs per VRF |
48 |
192 |
Management |
8 |
8 |
||
NFS vFiler VLANs |
8 |
32 |
||
MAC |
Total MAC addresses |
4,000 |
~13,000 |
|
UCS |
VM |
Test VMs |
32 |
128 |
VMs per blade server ratio |
4:1 |
4:1 |
In addition, an 8 tenant multicast implementation was added to the validation which brought the following multicast scale parameters into the architecture.
|
|
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Nexus 7010
|
Multicast
|
PIM adjacencies unprotected zone only |
48 |
Total mroutes unprotected zone only |
128 |
||
Total number of (*,G) routes unprotected zone only |
64 |
||
Total number of (S,G) routes unprotected zone only |
64 |