Hi Patrice,

Up to reception timer traffic disruption in transient phase is one of the 
issues.



Thanks,

weiguo

________________________________
From: Patrice Brissette (pbrisset) [[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 20:54
To: Haoweiguo; John E Drake; Ali Sajassi (sajassi); [email protected]
Subject: Re: [bess] Handshaking among PEs in an EVPN ES based on Paxos algorithm

Weiguo,

You mention "But if your draft have not solved all issues”,
Can you explain what Satya’s draft is not solving?


Regards,

Patrice

   
[http://www.cisco.com/web/europe/images/email/signature/est2014/logo_06.png?ct=1406640631632]

Patrice Brissette
TECHNICAL LEADER.ENGINEERING

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Phone: +1 613 254 3336


Cisco Systems Canada Co. / Les Systemes Cisco Canada CIE
Canada
Cisco.com<http://www.cisco.com/global/CA/>



[http://www.cisco.com/assets/swa/img/thinkbeforeyouprint.gif] Think before you 
print.

This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of 
the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others 
is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to 
receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete 
all copies of this message.

Please click 
here<http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html> for 
Company Registration Information.




From: Haoweiguo <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 at 10:38 PM
To: John E Drake <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Ali Sajassi 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, 
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [bess] Handshaking among PEs in an EVPN ES based on Paxos algorithm


Hi John,

 Firstly i think EVPN community should reach consensus on the issues of current 
DF election mechanism. All these issues should be resolved in a single new DF 
election draft,rather than in multiple separate drafts. If your draft can solve 
all these issues and stable, i have no question for its progressing. But if 
your draft have not solved all issues, i think it had better combine with other 
drafts to provide a comprehensive solution. I think the issues listed in 
draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-ac-df-01 and draft-hao-bess-evpn-df-handshaking-00 is 
valid, it should be resolved. So i think although your new Hash algorithm for 
DF election is good, it only includes partial enhancements, maybe it still 
needs some time for consensus.



Thanks,

weiguo

________________________________
From: John E Drake [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 7:16
To: Haoweiguo; Ali Sajassi (sajassi); [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [bess] Handshaking among PEs in an EVPN ES based on Paxos algorithm

Weiguo,

Your proposal introduces a control plane processing load that is O(#EVIs * PEs) 
per DF election and given that there can be 4K EVIs per ES, this looks like a 
*substantial* load.  Furthermore,
you can’t  use the ES route to co-ordinate DF election because you would need 
to carry your new extended community for each EVI and they would not all fit.  
You also can’t use the Per EVI Ethernet AD route because that is processed by 
all PEs in the EVI.

I think that from a practical perspective the new DF election proposed in 
Satya’s draft is sufficiently stable that it renders your draft moot, even if 
it could be made to work.
Yours Irrespectively,

John

From: BESS [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Haoweiguo
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 5:34 PM
To: Ali Sajassi (sajassi); [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [bess] Handshaking among PEs in an EVPN ES based on Paxos algorithm


Hi Ali,

Thanks for your information. I scanned through this draft, it really introduces 
inter-chassis message for DF election handshaking, the requirements in this 
draft is to eliminate transiet Loop and traffic duplication. Current EVPN DF 
election mechanism already eliminated loop and traffic duplication by 
configuring long reception timer on each multi-homed PE, but up to reception 
timer traffic disruption issue still exist. EVPN for DCI is an important use 
case for EVPN, up to reception timer traffic disruption can't be tolerated for 
service providers, it should be improved.

Also for accuracy, i think handshaking state machine on each multi-homed PE is 
also needed. From solution perspective, in my draft, no inter-chassis message 
is introduced, only one new extended community is introduced, i think the 
process is comparatively simple than your following draft.



Current EVPN DF election has some drawbacks, so there are three new drafts 
about DF election emerged. I think BESS WG can consider these three drafts in 
global view,  a single,comprehensive new DF election draft is hoped.



thanks.



Thanks,

weiguo

________________________________
From: BESS [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] on behalf of 
Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 0:21
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [bess] Handshaking among PEs in an EVPN ES based on Paxos algorithm

FYI- First published July 4, 2011

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sajassi-l2vpn-evpn-segment-route/


-Ali
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Reply via email to