Re: [bess] [Pals] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree

​ Stewart, authors and all, One of the nits in the review mentions inconsistent use of MUST not in the text that defines what constitutes an E-Tree service. I have noticed that the same fragment also contains several cases of may, and it is not clear to me whether it should be replaced by

Re: [bess] [Pals] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree

: Jiangyuanlong [mailto:jiangyuanl...@huawei.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:46 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein; draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-et...@tools.ietf.org; p...@ietf.org; stbry...@cisco.com Cc: l2vpn-cha...@tools.ietf.org; bess-cha...@tools.ietf.org; pals-cha...@tools.ietf.org; bess@ietf.org Subject: RE

Re: [bess] New bess Co-Chair

+1 Thump typed by Sasha Vainshtein From: BESS on behalf of Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 4:41:58 PM To: Jeff Tantsura; Dolganow, Andrew (Nokia - SG/Singapore) Cc: Rabadan,

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment-03

Matthew and all, I have yet to read the draft to provide detailed technical comments. However, as an initial editorial comment, I suggest to update references to drafts that have been already published as RFCs, e.g.: - [EVPN] Sajassi, et al., "BGP MPLS Based Ethernet VPN",

[bess] RTG-DIR Telechat review of draft-ietf-bess-dci-evpn-overlay

Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide

Re: [bess] RTG-DIR Telechat review of draft-ietf-bess-dci-evpn-overlay

draft is resuscitated and progressed – but this can take quite some time... Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Alvaro Retana [mailto:aretana.i...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 3:04 PM To: Alexander Vain

Re: [bess] RTG-DIR Telechat review of draft-ietf-bess-dci-evpn-overlay

: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 11:03 AM To: rtg-...@ietf.org Cc: rtg-...@ietf.org; 'draft-ietf-bess-dci-evpn-overlay@ietf.org' <draft-ietf-bess-dci-evpn-overlay@ietf.org>; 'bess@ietf.org' <bess@ietf.org> Subject: RTG-DIR Telechat review of draft-ietf-bess-dci-

Re: [bess] IPR Disclosure Juniper's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast

Hi all, I have looked up the IPR Disclosure Statement (pure curiosity) and it looks a bit strange to me. In particular, a search for the US Patent 4675202 yields a patent for egg yolk processing that is owned by NESTEC (with priority from 1984).

Re: [bess] IPR Disclosure Juniper's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast

of the inventor. Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: David Freedman [mailto:david.freed...@uk.clara.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 10:47 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: bess@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mc

[bess] Representation of ESI in the EVPN YANG model draft

Dear authors of draft-ietf-bess-yang, I have several questions regarding representation of Ethernet Segment Identifier (ESI) in the -05 version of the draft. 1. In the Ethernet Segment container the draft defines ethernet-segment-identifier as uint32. I do not understand how this can be

[bess] EVPN FECs in LSP Ping

Dear authors of the EVPN OAM requirements and Framework draft, I have looked up the draft, and it looks to me as a good starting point for work on EVPN OAM. I would like to clarify two points with regard to the draft: 1.

Re: [bess] A question regarding Single-Active ES redundancy mode and DF election in RFC 7432

To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) ; Michael Gorokhovsky ; Rotem Cohen ; Shell Nakash ; bess@ietf.org; Ron Sdayoor Subject: Re: [bess] A question regarding Single-Active ES redundancy mode and DF election in RFC 7432 Hi Sasha, Yes, the end result is sort of Port-Active from

Re: [bess] A question regarding Single-Active ES redundancy mode and DF election in RFC 7432

lto:kszarkow...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 12:14 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) ; Michael Gorokhovsky ; Rotem Cohen ; Shell Nakash ; bess@ietf.org; Ron Sdayoor Subject: Re: [bess] A question regarding Single-Active ES redundancy mode and DF election in

[bess] A question regarding Single-Active ES redundancy mode and DF election in RFC 7432

Ali and all, I have a question regarding one of the aspects of RFC 7432, namely operation of the default Designated Forwarder (DF) election process on an Ethernet Segment (ES) that operates in the Single-Active Redundancy Mode. RFC 7432 defines the Single-Active Redundancy Mode in Section 3 as

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Sajassi (sajassi) <saja...@cisco.com> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 7:20:16 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein; Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org Subject: Re: WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evp

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

, and lots ofthanks in advance, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) [mailto:matthew.bo...@nokia.com] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 11:48 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein <alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com>

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 5:14 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein <alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com>; Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <matthew.bo...@nokia.com> Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org; dra

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Matthew, and all, I’ve looked up the -01 version of the draft and I have found 5 references to a future revision of the document (all dealing with either LSM or MAC Mobility handling). These references are in the following sections: · 3.3.2 (LSM) · 4.2 (MAC mobility) ·

Re: [bess] All-Active Multi-homing and Virtual Ethernet Segments: A Question

is not mentioned in the draft. My 2c Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 7:11:22 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein; Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet); Ali Sajassi (sajassi) Cc: Michael Gorokho

Re: [bess] Questions about the EVPN YANG data model draft

equally apply to the -06 version. Regards, Sasha Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein From: Patrice Brissette (pbrisset) Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 3:19:28 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein; hs...@ciena.com; jorge.raba...@nokia.com; ing-wher_c...@jabil.com; ihuss

Re: [bess] Comments on L3VPN yang

Hi all, I fully agree with Stephane's point "the label mode should sit within the VRF and not at the BGP level. Each VRF may have a different flavor". One relevant use case is the VRF that provides inet-subnet forwarding i EVPN with Symmetric IRB - it must use per-VRF label allocation policy

Re: [bess] CW in EVPN: Was Signaling Control Word in EVPN

James, I am adding PALS WG to the list of addressees because, AFAIK, the PW CW is defined in this WG. I think that the really observed problem with incorrect ECMP behavior exists, but it is different from your description in your earlier email: Any LSR on the path between ingress and

[bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

Dear authors of draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-word, I have doubts regarding at least one of the approaches for negotiating the CW usage in the EVPN encapsulation between egress and ingress PE that is defined in the draft. In the

[bess] Questions about the EVPN YANG data model draft

Dear Editors of the EVPN YANG data model draft, I have several questions regarding the draft, and would highly appreciated your responses. 1. The -05 version of the draft has expired almost two months ago. Do you plan to refresh

Re: [bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

23, 2018 12:03 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-word.auth...@ietf.org Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] 答复: A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word Hi Alexander, The number of routes advertised by the Sender router in our solution will not change

Re: [bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

eceive”. Hope this helps. My 2c, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Yutianpeng (Tim) [mailto:yutianp...@huawei.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 5:32 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-wor

Re: [bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) [mailto:rainsword.w...@huawei.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 2:34 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: bess@ietf.org; draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-word.auth...@ietf.org Subject: RE: A question regarding draft-wang-bess

Re: [bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

, October 23, 2018 5:48 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; Wanghaibo (Rainsword) Cc: draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-word.auth...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org Subject: RE: A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word Hi Sasha, I am also thinking of this recently but haven’t talked with author yet. What

Re: [bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Yutianpeng (Tim) [mailto:yutianp...@huawei.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 9:40 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; Wanghaibo (Rainsword) Cc: draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-word.auth...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org Subject

Re: [bess] All-Active Multi-homing and Virtual Ethernet Segments: A Question

: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) [mailto:jorge.raba...@nokia.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 12:46 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: Michael Gorokhovsky ; Alexander Ferdman ; Shell Nakash ; bess@ietf.org; draft-sajassi-bess

Re: [bess] All-Active Multi-homing and Virtual Ethernet Segments: A Question

n View) [mailto:jorge.raba...@nokia.com] Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 11:38 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet) ; Ali Sajassi (sajassi) Cc: Michael Gorokhovsky ; Alexander Ferdman ; Shell Nakash ; bess@ietf.org; draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment.auth...@ietf.o

Re: [bess] EVPN FECs in LSP Ping

(paragj) [mailto:par...@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 2:09 AM To: Donald Eastlake ; Alexander Vainshtein Cc: draft-salam-bess-evpn-oam-req-fr...@ietf.org; Michael Gorokhovsky ; Ron Sdayoor ; bess@ietf.org; Rotem Cohen Subject: Re: [bess] EVPN FECs in LSP Ping Hi Sasha

[bess] FW: Signaling Control Word in EVPN

Resending because the previous message is has gone to the BESS list moderator Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Sunday, October 7, 2018 5:25 PM To: 'Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal' ; 'sbout

Re: [bess] A question regarding Single-Active ES redundancy mode and DF election in RFC 7432

nder.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 8:00 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: bess@ietf.org; Michael Gorokhovsky ; Shell Nakash ; Ron Sdayoor ; Rotem Cohen Subject: Re: A question regarding Single-Active ES redundancy

Re: [bess] EVPN FECs in LSP Ping

Sent: Sunday, September 23, 22:34 Subject: Re: EVPN FECs in LSP Ping To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: draft-salam-bess-evpn-oam-req-fr...@ietf.org, bess@ietf.org, Michael Gorokhovsky, Ron Sdayoor, Rotem Cohen Hi Sasha, On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 1:02 PM Alexander Vainshtein wrote: > > Donald,

Re: [bess] EVPN FECs in LSP Ping

(Nokia - US/Mountain View) Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 12:37:13 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein; Donald Eastlake Cc: draft-salam-bess-evpn-oam-req-fr...@ietf.org; Michael Gorokhovsky; Ron Sdayoor; bess@ietf.org; Rotem Cohen Subject: Re: [bess] EVPN FECs in LSP Ping Sasha, That is an excellent

Re: [bess] All-Active Multi-homing and Virtual Ethernet Segments: A Question

2c, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet) [mailto:lbur...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 5:46 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment.auth...@ietf.org

[bess] All-Active Multi-homing and Virtual Ethernet Segments: A Question

Dear authors of the EVPN Virtual Ethernet Segment draft, My colleagues and I have a question pertaining to support of All-Active redundancy mode in EVPN that uses virtual Ethernet Segments. Section 8.5 of RFC

Re: [bess] All-Active Multi-homing and Virtual Ethernet Segments: A Question

d by Sasha Vainshtein From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 7:07:00 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein; Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet) Cc: Michael Gorokhovsky; Alexander Ferdman; Shell Nakash; bess@ietf.org; draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-se

Re: [bess] EVPN FECs in LSP Ping

Service OAM frames (trap is required for LTM frames if MIP us intanciated in the PE). Does this make sense to you? Regards Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein From: Donald Eastlake Sent: Monday, September 17, 01:43 Subject: Re: EVPN FECs in LSP Ping To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: draft-salam-bess

Re: [bess] Poll for early allocation request for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label

Stephane, and all, Support. Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: BESS On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 5:10 PM To: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] Poll for early allocation

Re: [bess] A question about RFC 8317

s Cisco Canada CIE Cisco.com<http://www.cisco.com/web/CA/> From: BESS on behalf of "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" Date: Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 12:32 To: Alexander Vainshtein , "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" Cc: "John E Drake (jdr...@juniper.net)"

Re: [bess] A question about RFC 8317

e behavior in this use case. Regards, Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2018 7:52:05 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: Samer Salam (ssalam); John E Drake (jdr...@juniper.net); ju1...@att.com; sbout...@vmware.com;

Re: [bess] A question about RFC 8317

ember 20, 2018 7:31:20 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein; Ali Sajassi (saja...@cisco.com) Cc: Samer Salam (ssalam); John E Drake (jdr...@juniper.net); ju1...@att.com; sbout...@vmware.com; bess@ietf.org Subject: Re: A question about RFC 8317 Hi Sasha, What you are explaining is correct. PE3 would flood

[bess] Ingress and Egress PE in draft-ietf-bess-inter-subnet-forwarding-05

Hi all, It seems that the Ingress and Egress PEs in Section 3.2 "Symmetric IRB - Procedures" are used inconsistently - In the control plane sections (3.2.1 and 3.2.2) Ingress PE is the PE that locally learns a MAC/IP pair and advertises the relevant EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement Route,

[bess] A couple of questions regarding draft-ietf-bess-inter-subnet-forwrding-05

Dear colleagues, I would like to clarify a couple of points regarding extended communities mentioned in Section 3.2.1 of the draft . 1. This section says that the MAC.IP Advertisement EVPN route learned from ARP by the ingress is advertised along with the following two extended

Re: [bess] Review on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-06

Dear all, I concur with Tim’s comment regarding representation of ESI in draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-06. I have raised similar concerns in an email to the authors of the draft and to the WG last August (when the draft was

Re: [bess] Review on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-06

om/web/CA/> From: BESS mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of Alexander Vainshtein mailto:alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com>> Date: Sunday, March 3, 2019 at 05:46 To: Yu Tianpeng mailto:yutianpeng.i...@gmail.com>>, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang.auth...@ietf.org<

Re: [bess] A short question on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-07

) Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 11:27 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; Yu Tianpeng Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-y...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org; Michael Gorokhovsky ; Yechiel Rosengarten ; Ron Sdayoor Subject: Re: A short question on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-07 Guys, Thanks a lot for your comments

[bess] A short question on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-07

Hi all, I am now reading the draft, and I see that it is a substantial improvement over the earlier versions. At the same time I have a question regarding the definition of Type 3 (Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag) EVPN route in this (and previous) versions. The YANG definition of this route

Re: [bess] A short question on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-07

with regard to this issue. Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: Yu Tianpeng Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 9:52 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-y...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org; Michael Gorokhovsky ; Yechiel

Re: [bess] FW: Regarding the Alias label usage in EVPN Multihoming

Muthu and all, Quoting from Section 14.1.1 “Single-Active Redundancy Mode” of RFC 7432: If the primary PE encounters a failure, it MAY withdraw its set of Ethernet A-D per ES routes for the affected ES prior to withdrawing its set of MAC/IP Advertisement routes. If there is only

Re: [bess] SHL label

Hi all, I concur with Jorge. The ESI label is allocated per MH ES and does not depend on the service or on the method by which BUM frames are deliverd. This method only affects the way in which it is used: - in the case of ingress replication a copy that is sent to the specific LE attached to

Re: [bess] SHL label

, the ESI label MUST be assigned from the per-platfirm label space. This is my reading of Section 8.3.1 of RFC 7432. Hope this helps. Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein From: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 07:14 Subject: Re: [bess] SHL label To: Anush Mohan Cc: gangadhara reddy chavva

Re: [bess] SHL label

the per platform label space. My 2c. Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein From: Anush Mohan Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 06:38 Subject: Re: [bess] SHL label To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: gangadhara reddy chavva, bess@ietf.org, Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) hi, I had a follow up question

[bess] the L3VPN YANG module progress

Hi, I have noticed that the L3VPN YANG draft ( a BESS WG document) has expired almost half a year ago. Are there any plans to update it any time soon? Regards, and lots of thanks in advance, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com

Re: [bess] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8584 (5899)

Hi all, FWIW I concur with Jorge. Quoting from RFC 7432 Section 3: Broadcast Domain: In a bridged network, the broadcast domain corresponds to a Virtual LAN (VLAN), where a VLAN is typically represented by a single VLAN ID (VID) but can be represented by several VIDs

Re: [bess] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8584 (5899)

Luc and all, With regard to “Erratum 5900 makes somewhat more sense”: I am not sure how much more sense it means because: 1. RFC 7432, Section 3 says: “Bridge Table: An

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

Matthew and all, I have a couple of questions about the draft in question that, if answered, would help me to define my position with regard to its adoption: 1. The draft is a “bis” draft but it does not contain a section that lists the changes vs. RFC 5549 (customary in the “bis”

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

Stephane, Lots of thanks for a prompt and very informative response. Matthew, I support adoption of this draft. Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> From: slitkows.i...@gmail.com Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019, 16:56 To: Alexander Vain

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-brissette-bess-evpn-mh-pa-04

+1! Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com From: BESS On Behalf Of Thirumavalavan Periyannan (thiperiy) Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 8:25 AM To: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) ; bess@ietf.org Cc:

[bess] Hub-and-spoke support in EVPN: RFC 8317 vs. draft-wang-bess-evpn-context-label-04

Dear authors of draft-wang-bess-evpn-context-label-04, Section 2 "Problem Statement" of draft-wang-bess-evpn-context-label-04 states that " MPLS EVPN can't support hub/spoke use case, where the spoke PEs can only connect to each other through the hub PE. Especially when at least two of the

Re: [bess] Questions about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-yang-07

Hi all, This is a gentle reminder: I have not received any responses to my questions. Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 5:51 PM To: 'pbris...@cisco.com' ; 'ing

[bess] RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide

Re: [bess] RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

Adding RTG-DIR – my apologies Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 12:46 PM To: rtg-...@ietf.org Cc: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org; spr

Re: [bess] RFC7432bis : Request for review

. Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2021 4:11 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; jdr...@juniper.net; saja...@cisco.com Cc: bess@ietf.org; Michael Gorokhovsky

Re: [bess] RFC7432bis : Request for review

Hi authors and contributors of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis. I have started reading the draft in hope to find a section that describes the differences between the original RFC 7432 and the "bis" draft for this RFC. AFAIK, such sections are quite customary when a "bis" revision of an already

Re: [bess] RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 7:55 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; Cc: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org; spr...@ietf.org; Swadesh Agrawal

Re: [bess] RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

Talaulikar (ketant) Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 4:07 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org; spr...@ietf.org; Swadesh Agrawal (swaagraw) ; Zafar Ali (zali) ; rtg-...@ietf.org; Subject: RE: RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

Re: [bess] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-07

Matthew and all, Just to confirm that all issues raised in my RTG-DIR review have been successfully resolved with the -07 version of the draft. Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell:

Re: [bess] RTG-DIR early review: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates-10

Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Thursday, October 7, 2021 3:48 PM To: bess-cha...@ietf.org; 'draft-ietf-bess-evpm-bum-procedure-updates@ietf.org' Cc: rtg-...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org; 'Luc André Burdet' Subject: RTG-DIR early review: draft-ietf-bess-ev

[bess] Doubts about Section 9.6 of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy

Hi all, I have doubts about Section 9.6 of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy. This section deals with the scenarios in which ASBRs are re-writing Route Target Extended Communities of EVPN routes for

[bess] A question regarding DF election for Virtual Ethernet Segments

Hi, I have a question regarding Section 4.1 of the Virtual Ethernet Segment draft. This section describes the default DF election procedure defined in RFC 7432 for virtual Ethernet Segments and says in

Re: [bess] A question regarding DF election for Virtual Ethernet Segments

early stages. Therefore I think the former should be updated to avoid any further misunderstanding. My 2c, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: John E Drake Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 3:29 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; draft-iet

Re: [bess] A question regarding DF election for Virtual Ethernet Segments

17:16 To: John E Drake; Alexander Vainshtein Cc: bess@ietf.org; Luc André Burdet; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment@ietf.org; Martin Vigoureux Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: A question regarding DF election for Virtual Ethernet Segments I agree. Shepherd write-up dates to 2019-02-20 and is

Re: [bess] Doubts about Section 9.6 of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy

John, Looks fine, lots of thanks! Regards, Sasha Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> From: John E Drake Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021, 22:10 To: Alexander Vainshtein; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy@ietf.org Cc: bess@ietf.org; draf

Re: [bess] [EXTERNAL] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates-11: (with DISCUSS)

Hi all, I have done the RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates-10 (can be found here). All the issues I have raised in my review have been resolved when the -11 revision of the draft has been

[bess] RTG-DIR early review: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates-10

Hello I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this draft: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-bum-procedure-updates-10. The routing directorate will, on request from the working group chair,

Re: [bess] A few questions pertaining to the Virtual Ethernet Segment draft

Message- From: Patrice Brissette (pbrisset) Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 6:24 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment@ietf.org Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: A few questions pertaining to the Virtual Ethernet Segment draft Hi, Same... content

[bess] RtgDir Last Call review: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-08

Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide

Re: [bess] A few questions pertaining to the Virtual Ethernet Segment draft

Resending as it seems some people have not received it in full... Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 1:04 PM To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment@ietf.org

Re: [bess] A question about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping

Parag and all, A gentle reminder... Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2021 12:44 PM To: Parag Jain (paragj) Cc: bess@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping@ietf.org

[bess] A few questions pertaining to the Virtual Ethernet Segment draft

Hi, I have several questions with regard to the Virtual Ethernet Segment draft. 1. I have tried to understand how the customer Ethernet frames received by some EVI from an ENNI port (as defined in Section 1.1 of the Virtual Ethernet Segment

Re: [bess] A question about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping

Parag, Sure. Will be waiting for your response. Regards, Sasha Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> From: Parag Jain (paragj) Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 9:45:33 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: bess@ietf.org ; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ls

Re: [bess] A question about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping

gards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Alexander Vainshtein Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2021 12:03 PM To: Parag Jain (paragj) Cc: bess@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping@ietf.org Subject: RE: A question about draft-ietf-b

Re: [bess] Contradiction for the RFC 7432 definition of the fast convergence (withdrawal) for single-homed CEs

Eduard hi! I do not see any contradiction in your scenario. Mass withdrawal provides for (relatively) fast restoration of traffic that originally has been sent to a multi-homed customer site via one of the links comprising a multi-homed Ethernet Segment when this link fails. >From my POV

Re: [bess] A query regarding applicability of EVPN fast failover mechanisms to Port-Active multi-homing draft

: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet) Sent: Thursday, December 9, 2021 4:55 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mh-pa@ietf.org Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: A query regarding applicability of EVPN fast failover mechanisms to Port-Active

[bess] Queries on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df

Hi, I have a few questions with regard to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df: 1. The first statement in Section 4.4 of the draft says that "a capability to NOT preempt the existing DF for a given Ethernet Tag is required and

Re: [bess] Contradiction for the RFC 7432 definition of the fast convergence (withdrawal) for single-homed CEs

levant FDB entries. My 2c, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Vasilenko Eduard Sent: Thursday, December 9, 2021 2:24 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; Vasilenko Eduard Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Contradiction for th

[bess] A query regarding applicability of EVPN fast failover mechanisms to Port-Active multi-homing draft

Hi, A have a question regarding usage of EVPN fast failover mechanisms in combination with the port-active multi-homing mode as defined in the corresponding draft. Please configure the following scenario: 1. There are 3

Re: [bess] A question about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping

-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Parag Jain (paragj) Sent: Friday, December 3, 2021 5:31 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein Cc: bess@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping@ietf.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: A question about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping Hi Sacha, Thanks

Re: [bess] [EXTERNAL] EVPN service carving with ingress VLAN translation

Muthu, Quoting from Section 3 of 7432bis: Ethernet Tag: Used to represent a BD that is configured on a given ES for the purposes of DF election and identification for frames received from the CE.

Re: [bess] Questions and comments regarding draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis-02

To: Alexander Vainshtein ; draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis.auth...@ietf.org Cc: bess@ietf.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [bess] Questions and comments regarding draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis-02 Hi Sasha, Thanks for the careful review. Please see comments inline, for the changes incorporated you will see them in -04

Re: [bess] Queries on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df

;lowest PE" and not as in the draft. What, if anything, did I miss? Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale) Sent: Sunday, February 6, 2022 1:41 PM To: Alexander Vainshtein ; d

[bess] Questions and comments regarding draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis-02

Hi all, I have some new questions regarding this draft. 1. The definition of the F flag in the Layer 2 Attributes Extended Community in Section 7.11 of the draft (added to the list of flags defined in RFC

[bess] A question about NLRI of MAC-only EVPN Type 2 routes

Hi, NLRI of an EVPN Type 2 route as described in Section 7.2 of the 7423bis draft includes two optional fields: * IP address. Presence or absence of this field is indicated by its Length (a mandatory field in

[bess] Questions about ARP Probes in draft-ietf-bess-evpn-l2gw-proto-01

Hi, I have some questions regarding the highlighted text in Section 3.2.2 of draft-ietf-evpn-l2gw-proto-01: Peering PE in Single Flow Active mode, upon receiving notification of a protocol convergence-event from access (such as TCN), MUST: * As per legacy VPLS, perform a local MAC

Re: [bess] A question about draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-l3-optimized-irb

o: Neeraj Malhotra ; Ali Sajassi (sajassi) Cc: Alexander Vainshtein ; draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-l3-optimized-...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org; Nitsan Dolev Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [bess] A question about draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-l3-optimized-irb Hi Neeraj, Exactly! And I mentioned this during my pre

[bess] A question about draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-l3-optimized-irb

Hi, This the question I have tried to ask during the meeting. The Introduction to draft in question claims "improving MAC scalability of customer bridges and PE devices significantly". The first of

Re: [bess] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment-13

d with any specific ES 2. With "bridging EVPN, per-EVI Ethernet A-D routes are advertised just for multi-homed ES, therefore they cannot be used to distribute any information about singke-homed vES. My 2c, Sasha Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> ___

  1   2   >