Sasha, Thanks for your question as I couldn’t figure out what this draft was trying to do on my quick glance ☺
Aijun, EVPN-VPWS (RFC8214) applies to both MPLS and VxLAN as described in the document. Furthermore, although RFC9784 is written with MPLS access network as an example, it can easily be applied to VxLAN access since a VPWS instance can be either per RFC8214. So, in light of these two RFCs, are there anything that you want to do that is not covered by these two RFCs? Cheers, Ali From: Aijun Wang <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, July 24, 2025 at 10:54 AM To: 'Alexander Vainshtein' <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: [bess] Re: My question/comment about draft-wang-bess-l3-accessible-evpn-10 at the BESS WG session today Hi, Sasha: Using the concept of virtual segment in RFC 9784 to access the core EVPN service is similar with our proposal. The difference is that in RFC 9784, the access network is one MPLS based network, the PW can be identified by the corresponding MPLS label. But, in our proposal, the access network is one Layer 3 Native IP network, there is no MPLS deployed in the access network. Then, some new solution (especially how to identify the logical session, how to transfer them via the control plane and how to encapsulate them in the VxLAN packet should be defined. Does the above explanation address your concerns? If so, we can add some procedure description for our proposal according to another expert’s comments. Thanks! Best Regards Aijun Wang China Telecom From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2025 5:48 PM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [bess] My question/comment about draft-wang-bess-l3-accessible-evpn-10 at the BESS WG session today Hi all, Just to repeat my question/comment asked at the BESS WG session in Madrid today: I have asked whether the authors considered using the PWs crossing the L3 domains as Virtual Ethernet Segments as described in Section 1.3 of RFC 9784<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9784#section-1.3>? At the first glance, this could address all the problems with which this draft tries to cope. Regards, Sasha Disclaimer 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] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
