With FXC, VLANs from different ports are muxed onto a single service tunnel
(e.g., single PW). So, VLANs from one port on one PE can be spread on different
ports on the remote PE. Furthermore, only some of the the VLANs from different
ports on remote PE are multiplexed onto that service tunnel. So, for FXC, when
there is a failure on the local port, you cannot take down the corresponding
ports on the remote PE.
Cheers,
Ali
On 2/16/18, 2:50 AM, "Marco Marzetti" <ma...@lamehost.it> wrote:
Hello,
This question is not strictly related to this draft, but to VPWS in
general and may sound naive.
So *please* pardon me.
Shouldn't the port on the remote PE be turned down when its
equivalents on local PEs do the same?
This is something you can find on L2VPN VPWS signaled by LDP.
When local AC goes down the event is signaled via LDP to the other end
which in turn soft-shut the port.
I wonder if the same behavior could be replicated by EVPN VPWS.
In that case remote PE(s) would have to react to BGP prefix withdrawals.
Thank you
Regards
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:17 PM, Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
<saja...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> It has already been updated and the rev02 has been checked in.
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
> On 2/13/18, 6:43 AM, "Martin Vigoureux" <martin.vigour...@nokia.com>
wrote:
>
> ok, let us know when you've updated it, we'll call it for adoption
fater
> that.
>
> -m
>
> Le 2018-02-13 à 3:50, Ali Sajassi (sajassi) a écrit :
> > Hi Martin, Stephane:
> >
> > This is one of the draft in my plate that I needed to update and
ask for
> > a WG call. It has already been implemented by number of vendors and
has
> > had pretty good consensus.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ali
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
--
Marco
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
