Hi Stéphane, Neeraj/authors,

There is a use-case that was seemingly excluded from RFC7432 which I think this 
draft is a good candidate to cover.
I otherwise support progression.

RFC7432 s.10 addresses the gateway use-case, and enforces ESI=0 on any 
(optional)gateway MAC advertisement.

This draft which expands on use-cases of IRB/MAC mobility may be a good place 
to introduce and describe Aliasing and Backup(i.e. RFC7432 s.8) procedures on 
the Gateway MAC for multi-homing Gateways sharing a same MAC.
Currently RFC7432 specifies such gateways don’t need to advertise the MAC 
(s.10.1 §6, optional) whereas it may make sense to advertise them with nonzero 
ESI (alongside EADs).   Fast-failover of shared Gateway MACs could be covered 
here as an extension to 7432.

Thoughts? This could also potentially be done in 7432-bis.

Regards,
Luc André Burdet |  Cisco  |  [email protected]  |  Tel: +1 613 254 4814


From: BESS <[email protected]> on behalf of "[email protected]" 
<[email protected]>
Date: Monday, January 18, 2021 at 03:58
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and Implementation Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility-01


This email starts a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility-01 [1]







Please review the draft and send any comments to the BESS list. Also, please 
indicate if you support publishing the draft as a standards track RFC.







This poll runs until February 1st.







We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR 
rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).



If you are listed as an Author or a Contributor of this document please respond 
to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR. The Document won't progress without answers from all the 
Authors and Contributors.



There is currently no IPR disclosed.


In addition, we are polling for knowledge of implementations of this draft, per 
the BESS policy in [2].





Thank you,



Matthew & Stephane

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility/
[2] 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!X5h4y9zD3js4IFT_XC9-diCFCY2KETdVMSaYYY3ihMfJkJT9ibnhUx4IgRXhv_vc$>

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

Reply via email to