Hi Sasha,
When a MAC-VRF use a type 1 RD, is it expected that the RD of the EVPN
Instance has differnet RD on different PE? When a MAC-VRF use a type 2 RD, is
it expected that the RD of the EVPN Instance has the same RD on different PE?
In many deployment, whether the RD of the EVPN
Hi Jeffrey,
Please see Yubao2> below.
Thanks,
Yubao
原始邮件
发件人：Jeffrey(Zhaohui)Zhang
收件人：王玉保10045807;draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-inter-domain-op...@ietf.org;draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-...@ietf.org;jorge.raba...@nokia.com;
抄送人：bess@ietf.org;
日 期 ：2023年05月15日 22:18
主 题
Hi John
Thank you for your comments to improve the document further. We agree with your
input and will incorporate your suggestions in the next rev.
Regards,
Parag
From: John Scudder via Datatracker
Date: Monday, May 15, 2023 at 11:22 AM
To: The IESG
Cc:
John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping-10: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
Hi Yubao,
Please see zzh> below.
From: BESS On Behalf Of wang.yub...@zte.com.cn
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 3:32 AM
To: draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-inter-domain-op...@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-...@ietf.org; jorge.raba...@nokia.com
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] Discussion on
Hi Yubao,
Can you please clarify what you mean by “another way to construct A-D per ES
route has been in sight”?
From my POV using Type 1 RDs in all types of EVPN routes has multiple
advantages – starting from the fact that it prevents RRs suppressing routes
advertised by different PEs as part
Hi Sasha,
Thanks for your helpful notes.
There is only one method to determine the RD of A-D per ES routes in the
original years of RFC7432, but now there are at least two methods to determine
the RD of A-D per ES routes.
If it is the only reason why RFC7432 restrict the RD of A-D per
Yubao,
Please note that an EVPN PE that s attached to a MH ES, generally speaking, has
to generate multiple per-ES A-D routes with the ESI of this MH ES in their NLRI.
This happens because:
* The set of these routes, in its entirety, must carry the Route Targets of
all the EVI that are
Hi Jorge,
I think the description in draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-inter-domain-opt-b is OK.
But I don't know why the RD of AD per ES route is limited to type 1 RD. That's
why I talk about this together with rfc7432bis.
If the scenario from draft-rabadan-bess-evpn-inter-domain-opt-b has shown
