HI Aijun, I am simply highlighting three points -
* link is not the same as a leaf - prefix of the subnet * Today PE usually aggregates all subnets of VLANs into just one or few supernets. Links can not be aggregated. * Subnets are static. Here we are discussing adding dynamic data into this new amount of (stub) link information. Kind regards, R. On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 4:03 PM Aijun Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, Robert: > > Aijun Wang > China Telecom > > On Jan 13, 2022, at 22:29, Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> [WAJ] VLAN interface is the logical interfaces that connected to servers >> that are out side of the IGP domain. It is also different from the inter-AS >> link that described in RFC5316 and RFC5392. >> Some information that related to the attached severs or some policy to >> these server can be applied to these kind stub link. >> > > > Let's observe that there can be 4K VLANs on each trunk interface on a > given PE. There can be multiple trunks attached to each edge node going to > switches then in form of subnets to physical or virtual computes/pods/VMs > etc... . > > Are we ready to take the product of (# of PEs) * (N trunks from each PE) * > (Max 4K VLANs) in the form of new links into even local area IGP ? > Especially as we are learning that some of the values carried may be > dynamic in nature. > > > [WAJ]If there are so many of servers attached around all the PEs, we > certainly need all of the associated servers’ prefixes. Right? > If you want to some traffic engineering from/to these servers, or some > policies on the boundary, you should also need additional attributes of > them. > > Stub-Link TLV just the container for these information. > > > Thx, > R. > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
