Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3864.600.51.1.1\))
From: Madison Church <mchurch@staff.rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAY9wJQziHL6jxUEnwL94JvoZYPC1X9BQ-xjqZUZ1Vha0yDCgA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <AB56CAB7-803A-40A4-94A0-2FF6DA0D5C80@staff.rfc-editor.org>
References: <178120115911.18.17989457285890697516@rfc-editor.org>
 <CAAY9wJQziHL6jxUEnwL94JvoZYPC1X9BQ-xjqZUZ1Vha0yDCgA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anand Narayanan <anarayanan=40arista.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Message-ID-Hash: 2PLXGTTHZ72QMMGYK7GH26IJIC6SNCRI
CC: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, james.n.guichard@futurewei.com,
 apjoshi@cisco.com, jorge.rabadan@nokia.com, gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com,
 ketant.ietf@gmail.com, sajassi@gmail.com, nmalhotr@cisco.com,
 jdrake@juniper.net, slitkows.ietf@gmail.com, gunter@vandevelde.cc,
 ar977m@att.com, bess@ietf.org
Precedence: list
Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5Bbess=5D_Re=3A_=5BTechnical_Errata_Reported=5D_RFC9721_=289002?=
	=?utf-8?q?=29?=
Archived-At: 
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/ES7rJaE8xGJsH6PaMVfb2PddY84>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2026 14:54:01 

Hi Anand,

The RPC has deleted the duplicate report in favor of EID 9001.

Thank you!

Madison Church
RFC Production Center

> On Jun 11, 2026, at 3:20=E2=80=AFPM, Anand Narayanan =
<anarayanan=3D40arista.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>=20
> Hi All:
>=20
> Apologies for the duplicate entry. We can reject this in favor of =
Errata#9001
>=20
> Thanks
> Anand
>=20
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 1:06=E2=80=AFPM <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> =
wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9721,
> "Extended Mobility Procedures for Ethernet VPN Integrated Routing and =
Bridging (EVPN-IRB)"
>=20
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://errata.rfc-editor.org/eid9002/
>=20
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Anand Narayanan <anarayanan@arista.com>
>=20
> Section Abstract says:
>=20
> Original Text
> -------------
> The extensions are backward compatible with existing EVPN-IRB =
implementations and aim to optimize network performance in scenarios =
involving frequent IP address mobility.
>=20
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> The extensions while backwards incompatible, allow EVPN-IRB =
implementations to deterministically handle scenarios involving frequent =
IP address mobility
>=20
> Notes
> -----
> The mobility procedures defined in RFC9721 does not seem backwards =
compatible with the procedures defined in RFC7432.=20
>=20
> Example:
>=20
> Premise:=20
>=20
> 1. An RFC7432 speaker has MAC Mx with sequence number =3D 1
> 2. An RFC9721 speaker has MAC My with sequence number =3D 2
>=20
> Sequence of Events:
>=20
> 1. The RFC9721 speaker learns a local ARP for IPx-My, and advertised =
MAC-IP route with sequence number 2
> 2. IPx moves to be behind RFC7432 speaker
> 3. RFC7432 speaker would simply advertise IPx-Mx with sequence number =
1
> 4. When RFC9721 speaker receives the MAC-IP route advertised by =
RFC7432 for IPx-Mx, it will be unable to remove it's local ARP binding =
because the remote route has an inferior sequence number.
>=20
> This makes the schemes not compatible with each other.
>=20
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". Please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party =20
> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>=20
> --------------------------------------
> RFC9721 (draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Extended Mobility Procedures for Ethernet VPN =
Integrated Routing and Bridging (EVPN-IRB)
> Publication Date    : April 2025
> Author(s)           : N. Malhotra, Ed., A. Sajassi, A. Pattekar, J. =
Rabadan, A. Lingala, J. Drake
> Category            : Proposed Standard
> Source              : bess (rtg)
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG