Hi Jorge,
As I pointed out in my previous email, the use of flag is not a viable option
because it requires update to every single PE for it to be effective. Before
getting too much into a new solution with many restrictions, we should evaluate
the current mechanisms and if they fall short,
Hi John,
Your suggestion (of defining a flag mcast flag EC) requires that in addition to
gateways upgrade, all other PEs to be upgraded. I think option-A in my earlier
email is the best option for Sandy’s use case and it provide that with the
existing WG drafts without inventing/developing a
Eric, Jorge,
At the time I wrote RFC 7432, I had an implicit assumption that IMET routes
advertisement is based on EVI/BD configuration only and thus it is not
dependent on failure scenario, single-homing scenario, etc. If there was not a
better option to solve Sandy’s use case, then I would
Some additional comments inline [Satya]
From: BESS > on behalf of
Sandy Breeze >
Date: Saturday, March 24, 2018 at 11:39 AM
To: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)"
John, Eric, Jorge,
[Sandy] Comments inline
On 24/03/2018, 10:57, "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)"
> wrote:
Eric, as discussed and you point out, one can easily interpret that IMET is not
mandatory in some cases where
Eric, as discussed and you point out, one can easily interpret that IMET is not
mandatory in some cases where multi-destination traffic is not needed. In any
case, whether this document is Informational or Standards Track is probably not
that important.
If this had to be done, out of the