Hi Tony,
As I said earlier, the current proposal implies the IP is unique in the
proxy-arp/nd table.
If PE1 gets IP1->M1 from PE2 and later IP1->M2 from PE3, the latter will
override the former (see also the optional confirm message in my other
email).
Now, in order to make sure the arp/nd caches of the CEs/hosts are kept up
to date with the latest information we are suggesting the following:
"The following procedure associated to the Learning sub-function is
recommended:
o When a new Proxy-ARP/ND EVPN or static active entry is learnt (or
provisioned) the PE SHOULD send an unsolicited GARP or NA message
to the access CEs. This makes sure the CE ARP/ND caches are updated
even if the ARP/NS/NA messages from remote CEs are not flooded in
the EVPN network.”
Thanks.
Jorge
-----Original Message-----
From: Antoni Przygienda <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 at 4:56 PM
To: Erik Nordmark <[email protected]>, Jorge Rabadan
<[email protected]>, "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)"
<[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [bess] ARP ND draft
>> > b)It is worth explaining what is suggested behavior if eVPN advertises
>> > the same IP with multiple MACs and what happens when e.g. the served
>> > MAC vanishes
>> >
>> Doesn't the EVPN RFC already stating that the routes would be withdrawn
>>in
>> that case?
>
>The scenario I had in mind was when eVPN PE receives
>
>From PE2 IP1/M1 and later
>From PE3 IP1/M2
>
>while having answered with IP1/M1 per proxy alrady. Additionally, in such
>situation ends up seeing
>
>From PE2 IP1/<no MAC>
>
>So the answer it gave is not valid anymore all of a sudden.
>
>--- tony
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
