Thanks Jim and Jeffrey for the comments,

We will move the BW section to the service-edge-gateway draft specially for the 
single side signaling and we will mention that the BW can be handled 
orthogonally too.

Thanks,

Sami
From: "UTTARO, JAMES" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 at 7:17 AM
To: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, 
Sami Boutros <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: RE: [bess] FW: WG Last Call (including implem status & shepherd) for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-03

Sami,

                My two cents ;) These constraints will most likely be managed 
by the SP in an orthogonally from the creating of PWs.. At least that would be 
my approach.. So, goes something like, service requested, check available 
resources ( BW, Ports, latency, etc… ) select endpoints that meet the criteria.

Jim Uttaro

From: BESS [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 5:41 PM
To: Sami Boutros <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [bess] FW: WG Last Call (including implem status & shepherd) for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-03

Hi Sami,

I thought about this BW topic further, and have the following question:

- Even for the originally stated purpose, i.e. for PE1 to request PE2 to 
request BW reservation in the network, why does it have to be signaled from 
PE1? Why can’t you provision PE2 to request that BW reservation? You need to 
provision service identifier on both PE1 and PE2 anyway, so you might as well 
add BW provisioning on PE2.



I understand that draft-boutros-bess-evpn-vpws-service-edge-gateway-02 does 
specify that the service node could skip the service identifier configuration 
and automatically signals the one that it receives from the access node. In 
that case, signaling qos/bw parameters from the access node makes sense (in 
that there is no need for configuration on the service node side).



So, perhaps the entire BW or shaping signaling stuff could be moved from the 
base EVPN-VPWS draft to draft-boutros-bess-evpn-vpws-service-edge-gateway?



Jeffrey

Sami: The issue here is that we are using the BW idr draft, and there is no 
shaping defined there, and we don’t plan to define a new attribute for this, 
perhaps we can add that to a new draft?
 Zzh2> Good point that BW is not equal to shaping parameters; however, existing 
PW specifications do not seem to have BW related stuff and one actual customer 
use case I am aware of with EVPN VPWS actually does involve shaping; so maybe 
it’s better to take care of this in the base spec? It’s just a new attribute 
anyway.

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

Reply via email to