[bess] A comment and question for the draft "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-00"

Haoweiguo <haoweiguo@huawei.com> Tue, 25 November 2014 09:21 UTC

Return-Path: <haoweiguo@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C838C1A0081 for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 01:21:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UXKPxq6BWNPp for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 01:21:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C62B01A007C for <bess@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 01:21:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BPE76654; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 09:21:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.32) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 09:21:34 +0000
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.193]) by nkgeml401-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.32]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:21:30 +0800
From: Haoweiguo <haoweiguo@huawei.com>
To: "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>, "sajassi@cisco.com" <sajassi@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: A comment and question for the draft "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-00"
Thread-Index: AdAIkPxbbike4AnoRoyPect4oT/tcA==
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 09:21:29 +0000
Message-ID: <DD5FC8DE455C3348B94340C0AB5517334F81F431@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.135.23.94]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DD5FC8DE455C3348B94340C0AB5517334F81F431nkgeml501mbschi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/3NENhF67QlRNmw7jDGzxiin8D2M
Subject: [bess] A comment and question for the draft "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-00"
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 09:21:39 -0000

Hi Ali and other Co-authors,



In the EVPN IRB draft, Route Type-2 is used to advertise TS's MAC and IP. Two BGP Extended Communities are carried with each RT-2 route. The first community carries tunnel type, the second community carries NVE MAC. In normal case, all RT-2 routes from a remote NVE share same NVE MAC, so in this case the Route information encoding isn't compact.
So a new compact encoding method is introduced as follows:

1. Add tunnel type field in Route Type-2.
2. Introduce a new Route Type to exclusively advertise tunnel type,NVE MAC and L3 VN ID.
3. Ingress NVEs correlate the new Type Route and RT-2 routes advertised from egress NVE to get the NVO3 encapsulation information for inter-subnet IP traffic forwarding.



Maybe there are other more compact methods. I would like to hear your co-authors opinion on this point.

Thanks

weiguo