Hi,
There are minor things that could be improved in
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay wrt. consistency with
draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps :
* since draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps will deprecate RFC5512, it would be
better that draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay refers to
draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps and not anymore to RFC5512.
* I think it would be better to avoid the explicit list of encap types
in section 5.1.3, and rather refer to draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps instead
* the following minor modification was proposed, but not yet incorporated:
John Drake, 2015-11-13 (to BESS ML):
For the overlay draft, replace this text in section 5.1.3:
"If the BGP Encapsulation extended community is not present, then the default
MPLS encapsulation or a statically configured encapsulation is assumed."
With the following:
"Note that the MPLS encapsulation tunnel type is needed in order to distinguish
between an advertising node that only supports non-MPLS encapsulations and one that
supports MPLS and non-MPLS encapsulations. An advertising node that only supports MPLS
encapsulation does not need to advertise any encapsulation tunnel types; i.e., if the
BGP Encapsulation extended community is not present, then either MPLS encapsulation or a
statically configured encapsulation is assumed."
I think this change is useful and should be incorporated, although
skipping the last sentence would be wise if the full list of tunnel
types is removed.
Thanks in advance,
-Thomas
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
