Hi Linda, I haven’t read your draft yet. I am traveling now but will plan to read your draft over next couple of days and respond to your questions.
Cheers, Ali From: BESS <[email protected]> on behalf of Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 at 9:19 AM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: [bess] Comparing using the SD-WAN Overlay SAFI specified by draft-dunbar-idr-bgp-sdwan-overlay-ext with the EVPN approach described by draft-sajassi-bess-secure-evpn-00 IDR group, BESS group, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dunbar-idr-bgp-sdwan-overlay-ext/ specifies a new BGP SAFI (=74) in order to advertise a SD-WAN edge node’s capabilities in establishing SD-WAN overlay tunnels with other SD-WAN nodes through third party untrusted networks. draft-sajassi-bess-secure-evpn-00 describes an EVPN solution for PE nodes to exchange key and policy to create private pair-wise IPsec Security Associations without IKEv2 point-to-point signaling or any other direct peer-to-peer session establishment messages. I think those two solutions are not conflicting with each other. Actually they are compliment to each other to some degree. For example, * the Re-key mechanism described by draft-sajassi-bess-secure-evpn-00 can be utilized by draft-dunbar-idr-bgp-sdwan-overlay-ext * The SD-WAN Overlay SAFI can be useful to simplify the process on RR to re-distribute the Tunnel End properties to authorized peers. * When SD-WAN edge nodes use private address, or no IP address, NAT properties for the end points distribution described draft-dunbar-idr-bgp-sdwan-overlay-ext is necessary. * The secure channel between SD-WAN edge nodes and RR described by draft-dunbar-idr-bgp-sdwan-overlay-ext is necessary. Any thoughts? Thank you very much. Linda Dunbar
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
