Re: [Idr] [bess] Request for IDR WG review of draft-ietf-bess-ebgp-dmz-02

Hi everyone,

As part of the same review, I wanted to take advantage of Jeff’s email to throw a couple of comments if I may:

  *   While initially https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb defined a new extended community because the IDR link-bw extended community was non-transitive, the definition of the new community evolved and it defined a new “value-units” field which indicates what the weight is (bw or a generalized weight). Also the BW is expressed in Mbps.

  *   There are implementations and deployments of the above draft

  *   Now draft-ietf-bess-ebgp-dmz-02 also mentions that the link bandwidth extended community can be used not only with IPv4 (and I guess IPv6) families, but also VPN-IP and EVPN families. For EVPN the question would be – what’s the proposed interaction between the link BW extended community and the EVPN link BW extended community, if both are received on the same EVPN route? That should be clarified..

Thanks!
Jorge

From: BESS <bess-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, June 26, 2023 at 5:21 PM
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: idr-chairs@ietf.org <idr-chairs@ietf.org>, bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>, Matthew Bocci (Nokia) <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>, idr@ietf.org <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [bess] Request for IDR WG review of draft-ietf-bess-ebgp-dmz-02

CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information.

It is the second draft - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb

The authors have also defined a new community with the change transitivity as the motivation:

Link bandwidth extended community described in [BGP-LINK-BW] for layer 3 VPNs was considered for re-use here. This Link bandwidth extended community is however defined in [BGP-LINK-BW] as optional non-transitive. Since it is not possible to change deployed behavior of extended community defined in [BGP-LINK-BW], it was decided to define a new one.

> On Jun 26, 2023, at 2:44 PM, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On June 26, 2023 at 5:27:39 PM, Jeff Tantsura wrote:
>
> Jeff:
>
>> Over the last couple of years I have reached out to the authors of the
>> original draft at least twice with a request to refresh the draft and bring
>> the necessary changes in, without much success though.
>>
> ...
>> Note that there’s also an EVPN specific draft (standard track).
>
> That made me go look -- I found two related documents!  Are these what
> you're referring to?
>
>    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-weighted-hrw
>    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb
>
>
>> I’d be happy to volunteer to help managing the mess ;-)
>
> I know the idr/bess-chairs are listening. ;-)
>
>
> Alvaro.

_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess