Hi Sasha,

Thanks for your comments.
Please see zzh> below for some clarification.

From: Alexander Vainshtein <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2026 9:55 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: A couple of short comments on draft-ietf-bess-rfc6514bis

Hi,
I have looked up the 00-revision of the 6514bis 
draft<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-rfc6514bis-00__;!!NpxR!j8rByoiwA2OTFYATQspB3Lf3ZnZny9QAZs4YsIssQ6nytaz9S-canxR140f_BZnr7G6QxoTg1tIqBj6wkEOWfTo5asm7$>,
 and I have a few short comments:

  1.  I think that the bis draft should contain a list of differences from the 
original RFC, but I do not find it in this case

Zzh> Yes, we will add a section to list the differences.


  1.  Specifically, none of the following is mentioned:
     *   RFC 6515 about usage of infrastructure addresses in the NLRI of the 
MCAST-VPN routes. This is very important because my colleagues have encountered 
a certain TEQ that reports S-PMSI routes with AFI 2 and IPv4 Originating 
Router's address as malformed
     *   RFC 6625 (wildcard)

Zzh> The draft is still a work in progress. The above-mentioned items are 
planned but have not been done yet, and 
https://github.com/zzhang2003/RFC6514bis/blob/main/WorkItems.md tracks all the 
work items that we planned.


  1.  I believe we have earlier discussed the problems associated with using 
the same RD in MVRF in different PEs to which a certain C-S is multihomed. But 
in the draft, just as in the original FC 6514, the requirement for unique RDs 
is limited to just the case of non-congruent unicast and multicast routing 
topologies.

Zzh> I don’t think we planned to loosen the requirement of unique RDs. Rather, 
even for GTM (where currently 0:0 RD can be used), unique non-0:0 RDs must be 
used in certain situations. The relevant text was in the pre-WG -01 revision 
(search for “GTM”) but temporarily removed in the -00 WG revision due to an IPR 
declaration glitch, but it will be added back in a future revision with proper 
IPR declaration.
Zzh> In short, we still have quite some work to do 😊
Zzh> Thanks.
Zzh> Jeffrey

Your timely feedback would be highly appreciated

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]

Reply via email to