Hi Stephane, That's fine. Hoping to hear from the authors on my comments..
Regards, Muthu On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 9:14 PM <slitkows.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Muthu, > > > > (Speaking as co-chair) > > > > Thanks for the feedback on the intended status. This has to be clarified > however this is not a blocking point for the adoption. We have time to > figure out the intended status of the document with the authors/WG and > adjust the text accordingly. > > > > > > Brgds, > > > > Stephane > > > > > > *From:* Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <muthu.a...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* vendredi 23 avril 2021 13:15 > *To:* slitkows.i...@gmail.com > *Cc:* bess@ietf.org; bess-cha...@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [bess] WG and IPR poll adoption poll for > draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop > > > > I support the adoption. However, have a few comments: > > > > The intended status of the draft is Informational, but it doesn't look > right. > > > > The abstract says: > > This document specifies how the different EVPN > > functional modes and types can interoperate with each other. This > document doesn't aim to redefine the existing functional modes > *but extend them for interoperability*. > > > > In addition, the draft has multiple normative statements. Hence, > believe the intended status should be standards track instead.. > > > > Section 4.2 says: > > With PE2 operating in Symmetric IRB and with enabled interop mode, > the MAC/IP route from PE1 (Asymmetric IRB) is processed in the > respective bridging, routing and adjacency table. Based on the Route- > Target for MAC-VRF1, the MAC address M1 will be imported into MAC- > VRF1 respectively and placed within BD0. > > * In addition, the host- binding information M1/IP1 MUST be installed > within PE2s adjacency table.* > > > > For a PE operating in symmetric IRB mode, it is not required to install > M1/P1 in the ARP/ND/adjacency table as > per draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding. Hence, I think this draft > is updating/extending draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding. > > > > The draft has the foll. description for Figure 2: > > The IRB interfaces for a common MAC-VRF/BD on > PE1 and PE2 use the *same IP address*. With the difference of the IRB > modes between PE1 (Asymmetric IRB) and PE2 (Symmetric IRB), there is > a difference in the MPLS Label presence as part of the MAC/IP routes > exchanged between the PEs. > > > > I guess it should say "same IP address and MAC address". Otherwise, it is > not necessary to install M1/P1 in PE2's adj table. If PE2 receives a packet > destined to P1, PE2 will initiate a glean procedure causing the host having > (M1, P1) to respond. The response will reach PE2, so PE2 will install in > its adjacency. The problem occurs only when both PE1 and PE2 use the same > anycast default gateway IP and MAC addresses (which is also the recommended > option as per draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding), in which case > the response from the host will be locally consumed by PE1. > > > > Regards, > > Muthu > > > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:36 PM <slitkows.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for > draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop-03 [1]. > > > > Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group > list. > > > > We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to > this document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with > IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). > > > > If you are listed as an author or a contributor of this document, please > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any > relevant undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document will > not progress without answers from all of the authors and contributors. > > > > Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document. > > > > If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please > explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been > disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > > > This poll for adoption closes on 4th May 2021. > > > > Regards, > > Matthew and Stephane > > > > > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess > >
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
