Hello All, Section 7.11.2 of the draft-ietf-bess-7432bis states that if there is a mismatch – either of the L2-MTU, the Flow Label, or the Control Word that
“the local PE MUST NOT add the remote PE as the EVPN destination for any of the corresponding service instances.” 1. Is the reasoning that all PEs of a particular instance must behave in the same manner with regard to including the Flow Label / Control word and the L2 MTU size? 2. What should be the behavior if local configuration is enabling the Flow Label and/or Control word but the L2-ATTR extended community is not received from a remote PE? Is the absence of L2-ATTR taken as meaning disabled and the remote PE must not be added ? Or perhaps it should be interpreted as unknown and the PE should assume that the local configuration applies also with regard to the remote PE? 3. Is the same behavior intended regarding EVPN-VPWS service instances as RFC 8214 only mentions L2-MTU mismatch but not control word mismatches. Thank you kindly. Best Regards, Menachem Dodge System Architect [signature_3683755730] +972-526175734<tel:+972-526175734> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> follow us on Linkedin<https://www.linkedin.com/company/drivenets> www.drivenets.com<http://www.drivenets.com/> [DriveNets Network Cloud]<https://drivenets.com/products/>
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
