From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <23037_1512483940_5A26AC64_23037_392_5_1512483939.26596.80.camel@orange.com>
References: <23037_1512483940_5A26AC64_23037_392_5_1512483939.26596.80.camel@orange.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 14:08:56 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMMESsy8FCTeOVGCNpfdUF9dMCuN_Mdmsz2GdLJR56sDEsHZxQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>, bess-chairs@ietf.org, 
 thomas.morin@orange.com
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c01f18d24988055f9f1489"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/GIWt0AIj9bT8nUb0IyUvcFh6QUc>
Subject: Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-08
Precedence: list

--001a11c01f18d24988055f9f1489
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On December 5, 2017 at 9:25:39 AM, thomas.morin@orange.com (
thomas.morin@orange.com) wrote:

> All,
>
> Martin Vigoureux, 2017-12-05 11:34:
>
>
> Alvaro: [...]
>
>
> What about Geneve (draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve)? The nvo3 WG is
> focusing on
> Geneve as the Standard encapsulation, but this document doesn=E2=80=99t
> even mention it.
>
>
> Indeed. But The decision by NVO3 to work on Geneve is fairly recent.
> I have indicated in the BESS report that we'll likely be working
> closeer
> with NVO3 from now on. An individual draft on the applicability of
> EVPN
> to NVO3 networks is targeting NVO3 WG. Conversely, an individual
> draft
> on EVPN extensions for Geneve is targeting BESS. We have agreed that
> we'll do cross reviews at the important milestones of these docs.
>
>
> Perhaps draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay could hint on such a Geneve
> work for EVPN; something like: "Adapting the EVPN control plane to the
> Geneve encapsulation is out of the scope of this document, and is
> expected to be covered in a separate document based on the same
> architectural principles"
>
Perfect, thanks!

Is that draft already in the works, or just planned?

Alvaro.

--001a11c01f18d24988055f9f1489
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head></head><body><p class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"color:#000">On D=
ecember 5, 2017 at 9:25:39 AM, <a href=3D"mailto:thomas.morin@orange.com">t=
homas.morin@orange.com</a> (<a href=3D"mailto:thomas.morin@orange.com">thom=
as.morin@orange.com</a>) wrote:</p> <blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"gmai=
l_quote"><span><div><div></div><div>All,
<br>
<br>Martin Vigoureux, 2017-12-05 11:34:
<br><blockquote type=3D"cite">
<br>Alvaro: [...]
<br><blockquote type=3D"cite">
<br>What about Geneve (draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve)?  The nvo3 WG is
<br>focusing on
<br>Geneve as the Standard encapsulation, but this document doesn=E2=80=99t
<br>even mention it.
<br></blockquote>
<br>Indeed. But The decision by NVO3 to work on Geneve is fairly recent.
<br>I have indicated in the BESS report that we&#39;ll likely be working
<br>closeer =20
<br>with NVO3 from now on. An individual draft on the applicability of
<br>EVPN =20
<br>to NVO3 networks is targeting NVO3 WG. Conversely, an individual
<br>draft =20
<br>on EVPN extensions for Geneve is targeting BESS. We have agreed that =
=20
<br>we&#39;ll do cross reviews at the important milestones of these docs.
<br></blockquote>
<br>Perhaps draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay could hint on such a Geneve
<br>work for EVPN; something like: &quot;Adapting the EVPN control plane to=
 the
<br>Geneve encapsulation is out of the scope of this document, and is
<br>expected to be covered in a separate document based on the same
<br>architectural principles&quot; </div></div></span></blockquote><p>Perfe=
ct, thanks!</p><p>Is that draft already in the works, or just planned?</p><=
p>Alvaro.</p><div class=3D"bloop_sign"></div></body></html>

--001a11c01f18d24988055f9f1489--