Hello Sasha,

Thanks for your response.

If the only reason to keep the MAC addresses at the PE with the failed link is 
for implementing the EVPN Fast Reroute, then would it be possible to state this 
clearly in section 17.3; such that if the EVPN Fast Reroute is not supported or 
the EVPN Redirect Label was not received from the other PEs of that ESI, then 
BGP could send withdraw of MAC/IP Advertisement routes immediately.

Thank you kindly.

Best Regards,
Menachem


From: Alexander Vainshtein <alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com>
Date: Monday, 9 January 2023 at 14:22
To: Menachem Dodge <mdo...@drivenets.com>
Cc: bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Question regarding section 17.3 draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis
Menachem and all,
As I see it, Section 17.3 of 
7432bis<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dbess-2Drfc7432bis-2D06-23section-2D17.3&d=DwMFAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cezglEhs6Oa_CKN9mhFbT8T8kmWwaNdtBDjE9bvBG_E&m=dfM6dD-fslW05FpT7-3WWuNUAouGp6rNX5ABb5ciRm0&s=fHphfhvH0o5QSVnCcrA_dI1yivjVdxbrkq5Bn8ChUsk&e=>
 does not differ from Section 17.3 in RFC 
7432<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.rfc-2Deditor.org_rfc_rfc7432-23section-2D17.3&d=DwMFAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cezglEhs6Oa_CKN9mhFbT8T8kmWwaNdtBDjE9bvBG_E&m=dfM6dD-fslW05FpT7-3WWuNUAouGp6rNX5ABb5ciRm0&s=ut1QXQIflQEqnm0ubOZ7I_JC1pBwc-Hxzf5QiHhDWX4&e=>.
Both documents only define reaction of the EVPN Control Plane to failure of a 
PE-CE link, and these definitions guarantee that remote PEs would stop sending 
"known unicast" traffic for customer MAC addresses that have been learned from 
the failed link to the affected PE.

If the failed link belonged to a multi-homed Ethernet Segment, fast recovery of 
affected traffic can be provided using the method defined in the EVPN Fast 
Reroute<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_html_draft-2Dburdet-2Dbess-2Devpn-2Dfast-2Dreroute-2D03&d=DwMFAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cezglEhs6Oa_CKN9mhFbT8T8kmWwaNdtBDjE9bvBG_E&m=dfM6dD-fslW05FpT7-3WWuNUAouGp6rNX5ABb5ciRm0&s=QnbRrmQWvX1osKypfiORzfk0pcI1btu8O0d5-A15t4g&e=>
 draft.


Regards,
Sasha

From: BESS <bess-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Menachem Dodge
Sent: Monday, January 9, 2023 10:22 AM
To: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [bess] Question regarding section 17.3 
draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis

Hello All,


In section 17.3 of the draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis PE-to-CE Network Failures the 
first paragraph states that:

“If the connectivity between the multihomed CE and one of the PEs to which it 
is attached fails, the PE MUST withdraw the set of Ethernet A-D per ES routes 
that had been previously advertised for that ES.”

…

“When the MAC entry on the PE ages out, the PE MUST withdraw the MAC address 
from BGP.”

The last paragraph of that section 17.3 states that:

When a PE receives a withdrawal of a particular Ethernet A-D route from an 
advertising PE, it SHOULD consider all the MAC/IP Advertisement routes that are 
learned from the same ESI as in the Ethernet A-D route from the advertising PE 
as having been withdrawn. This optimizes the network convergence times in the 
event of PE-to-CE failures.

Clarification

Please could you explain why the PE that has detected the network failure to 
its CE is retaining the MAC addresses until age-out time, and only then 
withdrawing the MAC/IP Advertisement routes; while all the remote PEs that 
receive the withdrawal of the Ethernet A-D route should be considering all the 
MAC/IP Advertisement routes received from that PE and learned from that ESI as 
having been withdrawn, without waiting for the withdrawal of the MAC/IP 
Advertisement routes. This seems to be inconsistent behavior.

Thank you kindly.

Best Regards,

Menachem Dodge
System Architect
[signature_227873180]
+972-52-617-5734
mdo...@drivenets.com<mailto:mdo...@drivenets.com>
follow us on 
LinkedIn<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__clicktime.symantec.com_15siKypPPVR6CW288BcBc-3Fh-3DQZH9KlwmZbXPTDgoU19R1IAeBWh-5FJpPi0nB7SNM4AKM-3D-26u-3Dhttps-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_drivenets&d=DwMFAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cezglEhs6Oa_CKN9mhFbT8T8kmWwaNdtBDjE9bvBG_E&m=dfM6dD-fslW05FpT7-3WWuNUAouGp6rNX5ABb5ciRm0&s=9OlX8rX6IfH_0GKDtZmbU0YP2RPPFHNkYNPgqvQD0CA&e=>
www.drivenets.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.drivenets.com&d=DwQFAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=cezglEhs6Oa_CKN9mhFbT8T8kmWwaNdtBDjE9bvBG_E&m=dfM6dD-fslW05FpT7-3WWuNUAouGp6rNX5ABb5ciRm0&s=w0rbywVWm1U0Tp5-SHvZhy-SoynRxWRsKr5RlY6VbKU&e=>





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
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Reply via email to