Hi Sami, Please refer to my response inline in red …
From: BESS <[email protected]> on behalf of Boutros, Sami <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 2:31 PM To: BESS <[email protected]> Subject: [bess] Question on symmetric EVPN IRB RFC 9135 Hi, Looking at section 5.2, it doesn’t address quite few cases like for example. * What should the receiving PE do if it receives a non zero label2, but no IP VRF route target? Should we treat as asymmetric? No, non-zero label2 means it is symmetric IRB and if it doesn’t receive the corresponding IP-VRF RT, then it should be treated as an error and not be imported (also logged an error message). * What should the receiving PE do if the IP VRF route target import the route to a VRF different then the VRF the IRB interface belong to? will that even function? I guess, you are asking what happens when IP-VRF RT doesn’t correspond to MAC-VRF RT. In this case, the wrong RT will be imported into the wrong table if the receiving has a match for that wrong RT. But this is the same as IP-VPN use case when the transmitter uses the wrong RT – i.e., the receiver imports it into the wrong table when there is a match. The section seems to assume that the IP VRF route target must be present and must be related to the VRF the IRB interface belong too? If so, then why do we need to add an IP VRF route target to start with? Because IP-VRF table is identified uniquely via its own RT just like IP-VPN. Cheers, Ali Thanks, Sami
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
