Dear authors of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping-07
Will it be possible to get your help with answering some questions referring
this draft:
1. There is not yet IANA allocations for the draft’s Sub-TLV types and
return codes, when are they expected ?
2. In validation in the egress PE of an EVPN Type 2 route for a specific
IP→MAC pair, is it enough to compare just the MAC address in the sub-TLV with
the MAC-address in the advertised route, or should the IP→MAC pair be checked?
What, if at all, should be reported if a route has been advertised for the
specified MAC address but not for the specified IP→MAC pair?
3. What should be the return code to an LSP Ping Request for a Type 2 route
sent to the EVI that is elected as the Non-DF/Backup DF in
Single-Active/Port-Active mode?
4. How can the ingress PE check the aliasing function for MAC addresses
associated with an All-Active MH ES? In order to do so it has to select the
tunnel LSP to the egress PE, but the DP in the ingress PE does not have any
tunnel that resolves the “aliasing” path, such paths exist only for specific
MAC addresses.
5. How does the egress PE resolve the per EVI Ethernet AD Sub-TLV ? should
it look for a corresponding MAC which uses this aliasing ? what happens if the
egress PE hasn’t received any corresponding MAC route for this aliasing?
regards Ron
Notice: This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information of
Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or
proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, disclosure,
reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
sender immediately and then delete all copies, including any attachments.
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
