IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: 答复: comment on draft-rabadan-l2vpn-evpn-prefix-advertisement

"Henderickx, Wim (Wim)" <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com> Fri, 08 November 2013 20:37 UTC

Return-Path: <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B07211E80E9 for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 12:37:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.774
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.774 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-4.824, BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BjSue43GN+ON for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 12:37:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail4.lucent.com (ihemail4.lucent.com [135.245.0.39]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 711EC21E80E8 for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 12:37:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-122.lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by ihemail4.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id rA8Kawj3007144 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 14:37:00 -0600 (CST)
Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id rA8KawUT010289 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 21:36:58 +0100
Received: from FR711WXCHMBA07.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.3.193]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Fri, 8 Nov 2013 21:36:58 +0100
From: "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)" <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>, Lucy yong <lucy.yong@huawei.com>, "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: 答复: comment on draft-rabadan-l2vpn-evpn-prefix-advertisement
Thread-Topic: 答复: comment on draft-rabadan-l2vpn-evpn-prefix-advertisement
Thread-Index: Ac7cvqYcD4BB2/82Q4+fCPK55cREGP//WkCAgAComOD//1y+gA==
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 20:36:57 +0000
Message-ID: <CEA28A79.912E2%wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE08227AC5@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: nl-BE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.8.130913
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.39]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CEA28A79912E2wimhenderickxalcatellucentcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.39
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks <l2vpn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l2vpn>
List-Post: <mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 20:37:58 -0000

I don’t see why this should be discussed with L3VPN because E-Vpn from the beginning allowed this capability. The mechanism described here allows to optimise the scenario’s. We look at reusing L3VPn AFI/SAFI and given there is no MAC or ESI NH it is not suited for all scenario’s.
Hence the proposal.


From: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com<mailto:xuxiaohu@huawei.com>>
Date: Friday 8 November 2013 22:25
To: Wim Henderickx <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com<mailto:wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>>, Lucy yong <lucy.yong@huawei.com<mailto:lucy.yong@huawei.com>>, "l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>" <l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>>
Subject: 答复: comment on draft-rabadan-l2vpn-evpn-prefix-advertisement


Wim,



Since you mentioned that E-VPN distributes host routes, I wonder whether those host routes would be used for IP forwarding. If so, should this extension specification belong to the L3VPN scope?



Xiaohu

________________________________
发件人: l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org> [l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org>] 代表 Henderickx, Wim (Wim) [wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com<mailto:wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>]
发送时间: 2013年11月9日 4:17
收件人: Lucy yong; l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>
主题: Re: comment on draft-rabadan-l2vpn-evpn-prefix-advertisement

Lucy, did you read the draft and is explained in section 6.
Show an example on how you do the scenario’s with RT2 and you will see why this is less efficient/scalable + does not support all scenario’s in the draft like ESI NH.

E-VPN distributes host routes using RT-2: (IP) + MAC and these can be an interface e.g. And prefixes can exists behind them.

From: Lucy yong <lucy.yong@huawei.com<mailto:lucy.yong@huawei.com>>
Date: Friday 8 November 2013 22:10
To: "l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>" <l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>>
Subject: comment on draft-rabadan-l2vpn-evpn-prefix-advertisement

Hi Authors,

I am not convinced if RT 5 is necessary for the use cases you specified in the draft (or presentation). IMO: RT2 is sufficient to support all the cases.
There is a draft-yong-nvo3-nve, which covers all the L2 overlay cases, which can be implemented by EVPN with RT2.

One question, why EVPN service allow to VAP being an IP interface?

Thanks,
Lucy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email