Subject: Re: [bess] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment-11: (with COMMENT)

From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 22:22:45 +0000

Hi Martin,

Elaborating a bit further to ensure there is no ambiguity …

(S1.2)
"In some cases, this aggregation of PWs that share the same LSP pair may not be
possible. For instance, if PW3 were terminated into a third PE, e.g. PE3,
instead of PE1, the vES would need to be defined on a per individual PW on each
PE, i.e. PW3 and PW5 would belong to ES-1, whereas PW4 and PW6 would be
associated to ES-2."
<PATRICE> Indeed..corrected.

"defined on a per individual PW on each PE" is grammatically incorrect, but I
think you mean that each PW gets its own vES. But that would mean that you need
four ESs, not two.
<PATRICE> Not really since PW share common LSP.

Ali> A vES can consist of a group of PWs or group of LSPs (spread across two more PEs). In figure-2, the vES consists of two LSPs (LSP1 and LSP2) each with two PW2 (for a total of 4 PWs) spread across PE1 and PE2.  The new text clarifies this.

(S2) Please add EVI and Ethernet A-D to the glossary

<PATRICE> Done