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

Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> Thu, 07 March 2019 10:10 UTC

Return-Path: <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5C1913137E for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 02:10:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=eci365.onmicrosoft.com
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 SR0WCo4B2i6n for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 02:10:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail3.bemta25.messagelabs.com (mail3.bemta25.messagelabs.com [195.245.230.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC0E513136C for <bess@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 02:10:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [46.226.53.53] (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits)) by server-4.bemta.az-c.eu-west-1.aws.symcld.net id F6/F4-22588-11EE08C5; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 10:10:25 +0000
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA2VTfUwTdxjm17teT0LNWYq8dmpixxIla9f6kXV LRsi+0sVNHZronGYecLTnyoG9Eur8w27ROTEDx+oHtRVFRCgkhI9twiIRl1CoOlmRLQMVKuiU gRkxA+Wj212PMhf/uDfP73me932f+yU/ElMdIzUk43Qwdo62aYl4fO2qJyk66pFrh6G/bY2pO lCGmU43HCVM7gO7TDX18abAiJcwzTRtMN0vUacrzO7pBrl56u9ewtziua0wV1Y+lW3Ct8tZLj PPuUtufTz+rTx/og93VpeeQy7UEcKLUDyJUxUY+E51y8WDiiqRwWQkhEmHWwh+DZcJygKSoN6 AxtrbhIjV1BpoPjAV7cCochlcK72OiUIitR4eHB+eM70PgVAfKkKkgN+Ew19sEWmcSoEe9wlc xEpqJzxqcRHSsjEZVHn8hOhfQGXATFu26EHUYpgM1slEjFHJ0DdcHsVAqSH8y1VCwknwcCgil /yZMHDvLJL4FXDyjlch4WUQKj8yx38Adz31mLgKqBeh+cFOMQJQYwgmmjpwiU+Fi4NWya6Bya FxheTxquHWtQtzGWzQ0VMzN38pdFQFkGT6jYBST1dUUFFZ0Ol9jEum5eD/OoxLpm4MLt0dUBx FqZ5nfs4TvdTDCM55+wlP9JYWQVfZMC6ZOJj9vEHgSQGvgvrWVyR6BbiPhBUSXgkHvT7F8/zL MD1RRMT4/t5jcmlXJYLI6DgRM/Ve6CKeb9bBP7M35vnRnlE03/z9oW/wWPOhs/fQs81nkMqPT Jl21mJ15NKsTWc0GHRG42rdaoP4GfT0Z7osPVOgK2R4h86opwt5Pb83N8uWrecYRyMSHkF2fr DzIvJWW66gJaRMm6Rc+NC1Q7UwMy97r5XmrZ/YC2wMfwUtJUktKH8aFbRFdsbCOHNYm/CSYjK QCVq1slaUlXw+ncuzFkkKovXk5YqwDyPbJ8Va3HBfqM0DYm2N1rH2P3yYCufyOEaTrHxpTBhB iSOsBdz8gthrDaFlmkQliouLUyXkM/Zc1vF/fQQlk0ibqLzzpzAlgeUc8zlGhIgyIaK7a78Y0 UH/J2lcSL/WH9mcs7GpO6flcnFdsPZ8TYY+o5WwfNqe9kPFV09CNfw7ZP/QIPs6Q2T55Gk/Nq a8Wpf2Zef182eebitOKdng955grX+9t+fnwuDu4q3OU+nNbYG3v3Os3DP4sbmWS5raf/L36Xf Xfbj84ATsu7mx4KOZ9HXbq16LLLlhe+uFfbN1l7Q4b6WNqZidp/8Fzi/Ka6gEAAA=
X-Env-Sender: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-21.tower-305.messagelabs.com!1551953420!3087230!1
X-Originating-IP: [52.41.248.36]
X-SYMC-ESS-Client-Auth: mailfrom-relay-check=pass
X-StarScan-Received:
X-StarScan-Version: 9.31.5; banners=ecitele.com,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 24128 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2019 10:10:23 -0000
Received: from us-west-2a.mta.dlp.protect.symantec.com (HELO EUR02-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) (52.41.248.36) by server-21.tower-305.messagelabs.com with AES256-SHA256 encrypted SMTP; 7 Mar 2019 10:10:23 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ECI365.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-ecitele-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KFpvHDD37lTXciCTCt6FINAkRnfTOepEE7UUYKb5D9c=; b=kCuMd3wSTnUtpeB9WP/EuZYfdGKwyh1ea4jTnXQ75LQPOW9wzCWOtugCJ7g5332dYlqStBIO3C1SZbOi974xgqeiVGLqKC7iEX+kR5gwEvMSXjExhJR2GhegXw9z4BxA7EaWibuTOFRYN5oFsa0oUWJjEt8mLw84tCYapyA9Pp4=
Received: from AM0PR03MB3828.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (52.135.146.159) by AM0PR03MB4163.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (20.177.41.84) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1665.19; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 10:10:19 +0000
Received: from AM0PR03MB3828.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::cd69:f7a:ee65:6435]) by AM0PR03MB3828.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::cd69:f7a:ee65:6435%6]) with mapi id 15.20.1686.018; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 10:10:19 +0000
From: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
To: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <muthu.arul@gmail.com>
CC: chalapathi andhe <chalu.ietf@gmail.com>, Sean Wu <sean.wu@ericsson.com>, Jaikumar Somasundaram <jaikumar.somasundaram@ericsson.com>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>, "chalapathi.andhe@ericsson.com" <chalapathi.andhe@ericsson.com>, "Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet)" <lburdet@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [bess] FW: Regarding the Alias label usage in EVPN Multihoming
Thread-Index: AQHU0/0k/R72OM6yBUWHcxjdwWz3VaX+p7WAgAEVCICAADMPUA==
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2019 10:10:19 +0000
Message-ID: <AM0PR03MB382895A563A69BE489B656319D4C0@AM0PR03MB3828.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <VI1PR07MB4462872475A375E50C33F4C8E2730@VI1PR07MB4462.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <VI1PR07MB44620DB939F1ABE51DDED5B6E2730@VI1PR07MB4462.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAP3Cv1beDHnU0oBheDiG4863QC8vcgMpNkOy9JjkfiFgAWuFkw@mail.gmail.com> <478004F5-9B6E-49F0-9203-57F4953520DB@cisco.com> <CAKz0y8xbMQgWqYk18+zG4_NBF2O+iFGE_+aOzd1LKkMgdNc-1Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKz0y8xbMQgWqYk18+zG4_NBF2O+iFGE_+aOzd1LKkMgdNc-1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.234.241.1]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c201b1ff-4d85-45ad-224e-08d6a2e51a4a
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600127)(711020)(4605104)(4618075)(2017052603328)(7153060)(49563074)(7193020); SRVR:AM0PR03MB4163;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM0PR03MB4163:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1;AM0PR03MB4163;23: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
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <AM0PR03MB41636B025186D952DF2FAE429D4C0@AM0PR03MB4163.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 096943F07A
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(136003)(39860400002)(346002)(396003)(376002)(366004)(53754006)(189003)(199004)(129404003)(6116002)(53936002)(6246003)(52536013)(102836004)(2906002)(76176011)(6436002)(5660300002)(53546011)(229853002)(733005)(86362001)(71200400001)(71190400001)(6506007)(790700001)(99286004)(55016002)(33656002)(54556002)(54896002)(9686003)(6916009)(6306002)(236005)(7696005)(4326008)(97736004)(8936002)(26005)(186003)(7736002)(25786009)(316002)(606006)(256004)(14454004)(54906003)(3846002)(99936001)(5024004)(105586002)(74316002)(14444005)(106356001)(68736007)(93886005)(66066001)(5070765005)(72206003)(486006)(11346002)(966005)(8676002)(81166006)(446003)(476003)(478600001)(81156014); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:AM0PR03MB4163; H:AM0PR03MB3828.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ecitele.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: hFYN26+iPhxtfCsZksjTmEt42PhR2M/VJ770KI2YPSwLnuI6UViFGSob1hF2pUdBb7m6ZgwjAniffqMDyuoaWmHZrcXs2DsNWHX6mDEw1z3dVL9DsaGWaJDa1a3PZF2DPHTlg1R/faDUptVEe8ursZoQOLSr8xZhFgkyJtOch1pkrayPdS7eXsNesFBuiX7hM6nm8uYnWbPQcJzL5rjbyUFSTas17WI8/+1uEzuzTxQDmsPlqGTCQggs/v5zpVbHRVhAtl6hQg76HkNr6URjG8PJkYI1epdEUHDgzgukswKPZBKFqQTzVin/83aa3iePtPiohTDOSzjDU1TbBcx7rk9wqrgvxkknGil/itCoIb9OsX4MfGTXO4suKZQpg5e1DihDZ1zREgZsCnglJG0lomjKdxLpkPQ5JObf0A+X5dk=
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_005_AM0PR03MB382895A563A69BE489B656319D4C0AM0PR03MB3828eurp_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ecitele.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c201b1ff-4d85-45ad-224e-08d6a2e51a4a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 07 Mar 2019 10:10:19.0359 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2c514a61-08de-4519-b4c0-921fef62c42a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM0PR03MB4163
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/qEHqMDyE1Vco_DojCmQ_T7TbDgk>
Subject: Re: [bess] FW: Regarding the Alias label usage in EVPN Multihoming
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 07 Mar 2019 10:10:32 -0000

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 one backup PE for a given ES, the remote PE MAY use
   the primary PE's withdrawal of its set of Ethernet A-D per ES routes
   as a trigger to update its forwarding entries, for the associated MAC
   addresses, to point towards the backup PE.  As the backup PE starts
   learning the MAC addresses over its attached ES, it will start
   sending MAC/IP Advertisement routes while the failed PE withdraws its
   routes.  This mechanism minimizes the flooding of traffic during
   fail-over events.

   If there is more than one backup PE for a given ES, the remote PE
   MUST use the primary PE's withdrawal of its set of Ethernet A-D per
   ES routes as a trigger to start flooding traffic for the associated
   MAC addresses (as long as flooding of unknown unicast packets is
   administratively allowed), as it is not possible to select a single
   backup PE.

So there are actually three sub-cases in the single-active redundancy mode use case:

1.       The single-active multi-homed ES has been advertised by exactly two PEs. In this case withdrawal of the per-ES Ethernet A-D route by the primary PE may result in other PEs sending the unicast traffic for MAC addresses  learned from this ES to the secondary PE using the alias labels advertised for the corresponding EVI in the per-EVI Ethernet A-D routes.

2.       The  single-active multi-homed ES has been advertised by three or more PEs, and flooding of unknown unicast is allowed. In this case withdrawal of the per-ES Ethernet A-D route by the primary PE MUST result in flooding of the unicast traffic with unlearned MAC addresses using the common scheme for BUM traffic. The Aliasing labels are not relevant for this use case.

3.        The  single-active multi-homed ES has been advertised by three or more PEs, and flooding of unknown unicast is not allowed. In this case withdrawal of the per-ES Ethernet A-D route by the primary PE MUST in just local flooding of the unicast traffic with unlearned MAC addresses.

Hope this helps.
My 2c,
Sasha

Office: +972-39266302
Cell:      +972-549266302
Email:   Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com

From: BESS <bess-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal
Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2019 8:53 AM
To: Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet) <lburdet@cisco.com>
Cc: chalapathi andhe <chalu.ietf@gmail.com>; Sean Wu <sean.wu@ericsson.com>; Jaikumar Somasundaram <jaikumar.somasundaram@ericsson.com>; bess@ietf.org; chalapathi.andhe@ericsson.com
Subject: Re: [bess] FW: Regarding the Alias label usage in EVPN Multihoming

My understanding:

For the single-active case in the diagram below, when PE4 receives the A-D per ES route withdraw it won't know whether PE2 or PE3 will become the new primary/DF for the <ES, VLAN>, so it will start flooding the traffic destined to MAC1. Then either PE2 or PE3 will become the new primary/DF for the <ES, VLAN> and advertise the MAC/IP route for MAC1. PE4 will then start sending the traffic destined to MAC1 to the new primary.

For the all-active case, when PE4 receives the A-D per ES route withdraw it will update the nexthop list for MAC1 by removing PE1 from that list. PE4 will then load balance the traffic destined to MAC1 by send it to PE2 and PE3 using alias label.

Regards,
Muthu

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 7:51 PM Luc Andre Burdet (lburdet) <lburdet@cisco.com<mailto:lburdet@cisco.com>> wrote:
Hi Chalu,

Please read 7432 s.8.4: in single-active it is not an aliasing label/procedure but a backup-path procedure.
It will answer your questions (both, actually).

There is no flooding once the MAC is learnt & distributed: cf. that’s the point.


[http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/m/en_us/signaturetool/images/banners/standard/09_standard_graphic.png]




Luc André Burdet
lburdet@cisco.com<mailto:lburdet@cisco.com>
Tel: +1 613 254 4814






Cisco Systems Canada Co. / Les Systemes Cisco Canada CIE
Cisco.com<http://www.cisco.com/web/CA/>







From: BESS <bess-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of chalapathi andhe <chalu.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:chalu.ietf@gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 04:15
To: "bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>" <bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>>
Cc: Sean Wu <sean.wu@ericsson.com<mailto:sean.wu@ericsson.com>>, Jaikumar Somasundaram <jaikumar.somasundaram@ericsson.com<mailto:jaikumar.somasundaram@ericsson.com>>, "chalapathi.andhe@ericsson.com<mailto:chalapathi.andhe@ericsson.com>" <chalapathi.andhe@ericsson.com<mailto:chalapathi.andhe@ericsson.com>>
Subject: Re: [bess] FW: Regarding the Alias label usage in EVPN Multihoming



Hi All,

Can you please help us on the following issue.
In the following diagram, PE1, PE2, PE3 are connected to the same ES [ES1] in Single active mode, and PE4 is a remote PE.
Let’s say PE1 is advertising the MAC1 route, PE4 will install the MAC1 with the PE1 as primary path with MAC Label,
and PE2, PE3 as backup with the Alias Label. Now if the PE1 to CE1 link goes down, then PE1 withdraw the EAD/ES route
which will be processed by PE4.
Now what should the forwarding state at PE4 ?, PE4 should update the forwarding state of MAC1 with the PE2, PE3 Alias label
and any traffic destined to MAC1 should be flooded to PE2, PE3 with the Alias labels ?
Or packet should be flooded to PE2, PE3 with the Flood labels ? Or should it be some other method ?

In similar if the ES is operating in all active mode, what should be the forwarding state at PE4 ?
PE4 should update the forwarding state of MAC1 with the PE2, PE3 Alias label
and any traffic destined to MAC1 should be sent to either PE2 or PE3 with the Alias labels [ not flood to both] ?
Or packet should be flooded to PE2, PE3 with the Flood labels  or Alias Label ?
Or should it be some other method ?


[cid:1695247dcc04ce8e91]


Thanks,
Chalapathi.
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org<mailto:BESS@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

___________________________________________________________________________

This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information which is 
CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received this 
transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original 
and all copies thereof.
___________________________________________________________________________