Sounds good and both of my earlier comments are addressed in -07.

thanks,
Muthu

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 8:32 AM Ali Sajassi (sajassi) <saja...@cisco.com>
wrote:

>
>
> Mobility procedures for asymmetric IRB is very similar to symmetric IRB
> except for ARP response handling by the source NVE. So, I added the
> following sentence to the sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 in rev07.
>
>
>
> “In case of the asymmetric IRB, the source NVE also updates its ARP table
> with the received adjacency information and in case of the symmetric IRB,
> the source NVE removes the entry associated with the received <MAC, IP>
> from its local ARP table.”
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ali
>
>
>
> *From: *BESS <bess-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Muthu Arul Mozhi
> Perumal <muthu.a...@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 8:22 PM
> *To: *"bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[bess] Mobility procedure in
> draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding
>
>
>
> Section 4 (Mobility Procedure) of the draft says the following:
>
>
>
>    This section describes mobility procedures for both
>
>    symmetric and asymmetric IRB.
>
>
>
> However, it describes the mobility procedure only for symmetric IRB
> (section 4.1). Mobility procedure for asymmetric IRB is not described in
> the draft.
>
>
>
> Is the mobility procedure for asymmetric IRB expected to be described in
> an upcoming version of the draft?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Muthu
>
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Reply via email to