Re: [bess] Question on IRB MAC in draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding
Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <muthu.arul@gmail.com> Tue, 26 March 2019 05:57 UTC
Return-Path: <muthu.arul@gmail.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 5A621120286 for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 22:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 U223XIMEToPN for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 22:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x133.google.com (mail-lf1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12D7012026B for <bess@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 22:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x133.google.com with SMTP id r25so7723716lfn.13 for <bess@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 22:57:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=qsUXZjDpfFKYwnqgV/wXrhr6rgLJt4ec2n6K7YAh+pg=; b=jRvEFl57uiKJdQH5LUcT1wnGiQhleCifBuuazhMczZzLCm70StgEw21jfDrydpP7/r DnzKCNEFPKx3wyLf2RzXTmT0vBUhasXf2B66kmCuL2tDNj+0Bn6BEYYgAWsQ/z/lO9LS 9cB0IbkH5sNBCLmd9PY3ShM+7q65waS1PpFTSc1GS1Se8gdr98AFfhHKMuVt0sYfRGso buDJH+G7JXT8DimtmeXlhTEvp0cWchLqza1cT8tEnySxLs+VkoQhEAjgmB0EByTvHnVZ 4MEFxdISoldimm8KzsTb2aNUuoLxqdwHOZnZkcaOuj7mIavL67HTMSU64cJUtqTisoI6 BKSA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=qsUXZjDpfFKYwnqgV/wXrhr6rgLJt4ec2n6K7YAh+pg=; b=GIfx9MVytshX1QdFxLeFRbn1Ry/7Bu9ujusdZU9zXF2ZKwpfqdiNt42YHhxz17bqXO baN2BVj/F/TQQta7RvKzAqaJv6J8feagGlXI9pYzWvXUb6nKF+zxX7ATiR6FQMP3L/0J fk37i8gV4Kq+SIPYN8Bau3Js76x5v6OvMyimJdek1XGdml3hbmgKdgbxDSj4joNeJSt5 O22EmaDZmb98NrUeRr7TqzfVammYhmvnPz5kH6mmwUe3BCgkBafRribWiA9ja1/Dy5FU fGAeGcUBBzKgA+zAFT27G8q72ZAxGny5RCbZstlBe8emY9YRE6hoSdVQYW4bgTtUImPJ My4g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW0xB6paZhf0QSeHr/op6PCj/57Ew913OnvsSihvv/NCjJvugSn WAsTWGLLWeRi+oK8OAX0jyBRE20KyvEAG6uPobrH+g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyMYNvveebWbFXXhrD9pqg1WWG6Dgv50ZLDG2FpPTLhvip3HszIhN0Wbo3Nvn0r+ZLJDe6tUA6Zed+Ce4tSvxc=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:a40b:: with SMTP id q11mr14478240lfc.33.1553579873084; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 22:57:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAKz0y8y2=EowOpOCfw17bQnd4bE1Zpg4F12_HOj35ewkLNOUGg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKz0y8y2=EowOpOCfw17bQnd4bE1Zpg4F12_HOj35ewkLNOUGg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <muthu.arul@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 11:27:41 +0530
Message-ID: <CAKz0y8ynifDXOYCdH4avxtgBCKgqJ+E_uk4zEnNPqK=x6f5acA@mail.gmail.com>
To: bess@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007728ec0584f9000c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/ywciLi4dX-uXqH0qHG4AiERsGfc>
Subject: Re: [bess] Question on IRB MAC in draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 05:57:57 -0000
Hi authors, EVPN experts, Any feedback? Regards, Muthu On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 4:00 PM Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal < muthu.arul@gmail.com> wrote: > draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding describes two ways of > provisioning the default gateway MAC and IP addresses on the IRB interface > associated with the corresponding subnet: > > <snip> > 1. All the PEs for a given tenant subnet use the same anycast default > gateway IP and MAC addresses . On each PE, this default gateway IP > and MAC addresses correspond to the IRB interface connecting the BT > associated with the tenant's VLAN to the corresponding tenant's IP- > VRF. > > 2. Each PE for a given tenant subnet uses the same anycast default > gateway IP address but its own MAC address. These MAC addresses are > aliased to the same anycast default gateway IP address through the > use of the Default Gateway extended community as specified in > [RFC7432], which is carried in the EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement routes. > </snip> > > Further below it says: > > <snip> > Irrespective of using only the anycast address or both anycast and > non-anycast addresses on the same IRB, when a TS sends an ARP request > or ND Neighbor Solicitation (NS) to the PE that is attached to, the > request is sent for the anycast IP address of the IRB interface > associated with the TS's subnet and the reply will use anycast MAC > address (in both Source MAC in the Ethernet header and Sender > hardware address in the payload). > </snip> > > In the above, it says the ARP response or NS will use the anycast MAC > address. The question is, how is this feasible if the second option of provisioning > the default gateway MAC and IP addresses on the IRB interface are chosen, > where each PE for a given tenant subnet uses the same anycast default > gateway IP address but its own MAC address? > > Should it instead say: > the request is sent for the anycast IP address of the IRB interface > associated with the TS's subnet and the reply will use *configured* > MAC address? > > i.e. s/anycast MAC/configured MAC? > > Regards, > Muthu >
- [bess] Question on IRB MAC in draft-ietf-bess-evp… Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal
- Re: [bess] Question on IRB MAC in draft-ietf-bess… Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal