[bess] Some questions on E-Tree (RFC8317) services with VXLAN Encapsulation: is it feasible? is it necessary? is it under definition already?

<wang.yubao2@zte.com.cn> Wed, 07 February 2018 07:22 UTC

Return-Path: <wang.yubao2@zte.com.cn>
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 175CE1205D3 for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 23:22:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.209 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, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 jlaYftm7-fyM for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 23:22:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (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 8BB4B1204DA for <bess@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 23:22:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.164.217]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id EAB54F3471AC25829C95; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 15:22:39 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse01.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.3.20]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id CCF5ACDD434803883440; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 15:22:39 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp02.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.201]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with SMTP id w177MUEJ062319; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 15:22:30 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from wang.yubao2@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp04[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid203; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 15:22:31 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 15:22:31 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afc5a7aa937ffffffffdbe-0651b
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <201802071522316402979@zte.com.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: wang.yubao2@zte.com.cn
To: sajassi@cisco.com, ssalam@cisco.com, jdrake@juniper.net, ju1738@att.com, sboutros@vmware.com, jorge.rabadan@nokia.com
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn w177MUEJ062319
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/FRB72MvXrc50ygwZh8CojMYfuTA>
Subject: [bess] Some questions on E-Tree (RFC8317) services with VXLAN Encapsulation: is it feasible? is it necessary? is it under definition already?
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 07:22:43 -0000

Hi folks,






I have some questions on E-Tree services with VXLAN Encapsulation,






1) It seems that RFC8317 only defines E-Tree service in MPLS (or PBB over MPLS EVPN) encapsulation.


  but there are other EVPN encapsulations, VXLAN and SRv6,


  and the SRv6 EVPN solution also defined the E-Tree procedures framework with Arg.FE2 included in DT2M SIDs


  so, is the E-Tree service with VXLAN Encapsulation feasible? is it necessary? is it under definition already?






2) i think the primary design with E-tree over MPLS EVPN is ESI/Leaf Label,


  but in VXLAN encapsulation, there is no ESI Label or Leaf Label,


  so, although it can do ESI filtering procedures with "Local Bias" procedure and without ESI Label information,


  the VXLAN Encapsulation can't do E-tree filtering procedures without Leaf Label?


  is it right or i have missed something?






Best Regards,


Wang Yubao