Alvaro, > I-D.ietf-bess-ir and I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet should be Normative > References. I thought about this further, and would like to keep them both as informational for the following reasons. The extranet draft is referred to in the draft as following: ... The label may be shared with other P-tunnels, subject to the anti-ambiguity rules for extranet [I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-02#ref-I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet>]. Both extranet and label sharing are optional, not required for implementing the procedures in this draft.
As for draft-ietf-bess-ir: RFC 6514 specifies the use of IR P-tunnels, though there are some problems with RFC 6514's specification of IR P-tunnels, which are addressed in detail in draft-ietf-bess-ir. Draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication explains how to support a VPN customer's use of BIDIR-PIM when the service provider uses IR P-tunnels, but it doesn't really depend on those details specified in draft-ietf-bess-ir. Thus draft-ietf-bess-ir should not be a normative reference for it. Thanks! Jeffrey
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
