[bess] RFC 8395 on Extensions to BGP-Signaled Pseudowires to Support Flow-Aware Transport Labels
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 8395 Title: Extensions to BGP-Signaled Pseudowires to Support Flow-Aware Transport Labels Author: K. Patel, S. Boutros, J. Liste, B. Wen, J. Rabadan Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: June 2018 Mailbox:ke...@arrcus.com, sbout...@vmware.com, jli...@cisco.com, bin_...@cable.comcast.com, jorge.raba...@nokia.com Pages: 10 Characters: 17404 Updates:RFC 4761 I-D Tag:draft-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp-04.txt URL:https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8395 DOI:10.17487/RFC8395 This document defines protocol extensions required to synchronize flow label states among Provider Edges (PEs) when using the BGP-based signaling procedures. These protocol extensions are equally applicable to point-to-point Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs). This document updates RFC 4761 by defining new flags in the Control Flags field of the Layer2 Info Extended Community. This document is a product of the BGP Enabled Services Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Official Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
Re: [bess] Slot requests for BESS WG session - IETF 102 - Montreal
Hi Stephane I’ll like to request following slot: draft-jain-bess-evpn-lsp-ping-07 Speaker: Parag Jain Reason: WG adoption Duration: 8 mins Thanks Parag From: BESS on behalf of "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" Date: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 3:13 AM To: "bess@ietf.org" Subject: [bess] Slot requests for BESS WG session - IETF 102 - Montreal All, It is time we start building the BESS WG agenda for Montreal. Please send us your request for a presentation slot, indicating draft name, speaker, and desired duration (covering presentation and discussion). If it is not the first presentation of the draft, please give a reason why it is required to have a new presentation slot. Thank you Stephane & Matthew _ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
[bess] Some comments on draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-03
Hi Adrian and co-authors, I had a review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-03, thank you for this useful document and hope it can progress quickly. In my opinion, this version still has some ambiguities which need to be cleaned up: 1. In Section 3.1.1, it firstly says:" The SFI Pool Identifier is encoded as an 8 octet value as shown in Figure 4." However, it then says in the end of this subsection: "The SFI Pool Identifier is a six octet, globally unique value encoded in network byte order." These two sentences are confusing. The 1st occurrence of SFI Pool Identifier shall be fully spelled out as "SFI Pool Identifier extended community". Furthermore, "SPI Pool Identifier" in Figure 4 seems to be "SFI Pool Identifier" as there is no definition for the former term in the document. There are "SPI Pool Identifier" in other sections need to be consistent as well, such as "SPI Pool Identifier" in the last paragraph of Section 3.2.1.3. 2. The definitions of "Service Function Type" in Figure 3 and Figure 9 are different and ambiguous. Maybe it can be simply defined as "The identifier for a type of service function". 3. "SFIR-RD List" in Figure 9 may be replaced with "SFIR-RD/SFI pool ID list", as SFI pool ID is different from SFIR-RD and the list may consist of pure SFI pool IDs. One further note is, upon processing this variable, we need to distinguish RD Type and SFI Pool Identifier Type, the IANA will need to take care not to allocate 0x80XX for SFIR-RD Type. Some minor editorial comments: 4. "SFRIR-RD list" in Section 4.3 is misspelling. 5. s/a packets/a packet/ 6. s/ach subtended/as subtended/ BTW, I think it is useful to support load balancing SFs across multiple SFFs as described in Section 5.5 of RFC 7665, this will enable a more flexible deployment of similar service functions in multiple sites across a network, such as in 5G transport. In fact, Figure 11 in your draft already demonstrates that SF Type 41 has two instances attached to SFF1 and SFF2 respectively, I think another example can be added for load balancing across multiple SFFs, such as the following: -- | SFIa | |SFT=42| -- -- -- | | SFI || SFI | - |SFT=41||SFT=42| | SFF5 | -- --..|192.0.2.5|.. \/ ..: - :.. - .: :.- --| SFF1 |--/ - | SFF3 | -->|Class-|...|192.0.2.1|| SFF6 ||192.0.2.3|--> -->| ifier|- |192.0.2.6|:- -- - | |-- --| SFI | | SFIb | |SFT=43| |SFT=42|-- -- My 2 cents, B.R, Yuanlong ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
