> Section 6.2.2 describes integration between E-VPN and 2547 VPNs. It says:
A DCBR, in addition to implementing the E-VPN functionality, also implements functionality of a Provider Edge (PE) router, as specified in [RFC4364]. Question #1: Why anyone would prefer to implement both: E-VPN and RFC4364 rather then only RFC4364 option B on DCBR to solve his application and customer's needs ? Rgs, R. PS. EVPN spec says: The IP Address field is optional. By default, the IP Address Length field is set to 0 and the IP address field is omitted from the route. When a valid IP address is included, it is encoded as specified in section 12. + The IP address field in the MAC advertisement route may optionally carry one of the IP addresses associated with the MAC address. This provides an option which can be used to minimize the flooding of ARP or Neighbor Discovery (ND) messages over the MPLS network and to remote CEs. Question #2: Why we would not just leave it as this and only use IP carried in EVPN advertisements for proxy arp function ? _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
