IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bess] Mail regarding draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage

Zhuangshunwan <zhuangshunwan@huawei.com> Fri, 06 October 2023 14:26 UTC

Return-Path: <zhuangshunwan@huawei.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 6AF1BC1519BB for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tfEt1wbr0i6M for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:26:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F02EC151061 for <bess@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 07:26:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrpeml100001.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.206]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4S29fY2FScz6K5vp for <bess@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 22:24:21 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepemi100001.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.215) by lhrpeml100001.china.huawei.com (7.191.160.183) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.31; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 15:26:05 +0100
Received: from kwepemi500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.171) by kwepemi100001.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.215) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.31; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 22:26:03 +0800
Received: from kwepemi500002.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.171]) by kwepemi500002.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.171]) with mapi id 15.01.2507.031; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 22:26:03 +0800
From: Zhuangshunwan <zhuangshunwan@huawei.com>
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Mail regarding draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage
Thread-Index: Adnx/4kWolSuXrksSh2oIZ36lDmguAFy6LVwACUxKCA=
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2023 14:26:03 +0000
Message-ID: <6d5729534e2d4b8797e9b393d0606af0@huawei.com>
References: <b00aaa7b930e4b3fbf55a5c3ec847231@huawei.com> <CO1PR13MB492087F9F596AE5B95317C8C85CAA@CO1PR13MB4920.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CO1PR13MB492087F9F596AE5B95317C8C85CAA@CO1PR13MB4920.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.84.131.65]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_6d5729534e2d4b8797e9b393d0606af0huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/wYrTZ2mWByGzwTUhkPvQzarar8g>
Subject: Re: [bess] Mail regarding draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 06 Oct 2023 14:26:11 -0000

Hi Linda,

Thank you for your reply. I now understand the solution described in the draft and I support its WG adoption.

Best Regards,
Shunwan

From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:linda.dunbar@futurewei.com]
Sent: Friday, October 6, 2023 4:42 AM
To: Zhuangshunwan <zhuangshunwan@huawei.com>; bess@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Mail regarding draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage

ShunWan,

Thank you very much for review and the detailed comments.

Resolutions to your comments are inserted below.

Linda

From: BESS <bess-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:bess-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Zhuangshunwan
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 6:40 AM
To: bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>
Subject: [bess] Mail regarding draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage


Dear authors,

Some of the text in the section 5.2 of draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-15 describes the following:
"
5.2. BGP Walk Through for Homogeneous Encrypted SD-WAN
...

   UPDATE U1:



     - MP-NLRI Path Attribute:

         192.0.2.4/30

         192.0.2.8/30

     - Nexthop: 192.0.2.2 (C-PE2)

     - Encapsulation Extended Community: TYPE = IPsec





   UPDATE U2:

     - MP-NLRI Path Attribute:

         192.0.2.2 (C-PE2)

     - Tunnel Encapsulation Path Attributes (as described in the

     [SECURE-EVPN]) for IPsec SA detailed attributes, including the WAN

     address to be used as the IP address of the IPsec encrypted

     packets.



   If different client routes attached to C-PE2 need to be reached by

   separate IPsec tunnels, the Color-Extended-Community [RFC9012] is

   used to associate routes with the tunnels. See Section 8 of

   [RFC9012].
...
"

I have one comment on the above text:
Regarding the "Encapsulation Extended Community: TYPE = IPsec" in UPDATE U1, maybe the possible TYPE should be ESP-Transport or ESP-in-UDP-Transport as described in Sections 9.1 and 9.2 of [Security-EVPN]?

[Linda] that is another option. However, since the [Security-EVPN] is further away from reaching RFC stage, I feel we should use the standardized type for now.

Best Regards,
Shunwan

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email