RE: MAC route with IP

Antoni Przygienda <antoni.przygienda@ericsson.com> Mon, 12 May 2014 06:23 UTC

Return-Path: <antoni.przygienda@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F56E1A040B for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 11 May 2014 23:23:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 jvwmi5II5Pqb for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 11 May 2014 23:23:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usevmg20.ericsson.net (usevmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81EE51A03FE for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Sun, 11 May 2014 23:23:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c618062d-f79c96d000001cfc-01-5370198faa4d
Received: from EUSAAHC004.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.84]) by usevmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id B2.52.07420.F8910735; Mon, 12 May 2014 02:45:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC004.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Mon, 12 May 2014 02:23:11 -0400
From: Antoni Przygienda <antoni.przygienda@ericsson.com>
To: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <sajassi@cisco.com>, Jakob Heitz <jakob.heitz@ericsson.com>, "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: MAC route with IP
Thread-Topic: MAC route with IP
Thread-Index: Ac9tnTVAaQfHHQKqR0C1MGMVDrT48///65IA///deaCAACfogP//2UcQ
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 06:23:10 +0000
Message-ID: <2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F1812B4DF@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
References: <2F3EBB88EC3A454AAB08915FBF0B8C7E03053B8D@eusaamb109.ericsson.se> <CF95AD07.D382D%sajassi@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <CF95AD07.D382D%sajassi@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.11]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2E4BB27CAB87BF43B4207C0E55860F1812B4DFeusaamb103ericsso_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrDLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPiG6/ZEGwwcZ7JhaPvx1it3h3tpnF gcljyu+NrB5LlvxkCmCK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4MrY2vqKveDeF8aKzc/PMDcwfrjJ2MXIwSEh YCKx+qt+FyMnkCkmceHeerYuRi4OIYGjjBKtE/6zQjjLGSXWr//DBFLFJmAhcfnbU2YQW0Sg RmLht/esILawgJzE546jTBBxeYnGH2tZQRaICLhJPHyhAxJmEVCV6Nl8HSzMK+AtcaEvHyQs JFAksWblbkYQm1NAX6Lv5WwWEJsR6J7vp9aATWQWEJe49WQ+E8SdAhJL9pxnhrBFJV4+/scK YStJfPw9nx2iPl/i98QtYPW8AoISJ2c+YZnAKDILyahZSMpmISmDiOtILNj9iQ3C1pZYtvA1 M4x95sBjJmTxBYzsqxg5SotTy3LTjQw2MQKj55gEm+4Oxj0vLQ8xCnAwKvHwLtiVHyzEmlhW XJl7iFGag0VJnLfgS2ywkEB6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmrxIUYmDk6pBsZF/J2vNp3YfdSc8Rx3 /p+4W5Ucsz7/WtfP9SF25mnV2yuzWpS6dvwofN4WbuQTrLtw3e/Ed3G/mv963L9h2MmRd6vO gWt6w/KNHP+ktLl9n/t9Zbu3+ElK1hqXPZJXHuuJr+aL2uNeu9rmRP/n9FMpERyzSnYH6H+u UrXac2F3wlGTkOoLll+VWIozEg21mIuKEwFHKSpdfwIAAA==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2vpn/AfdzzTLRkA-3xYr0QvTKcEmkip8
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 12 May 2014 06:23:21 -0000

Ali,

there are at least two cases when receiving updates from peers which are tad hairy given the encoding:


1.      We receive a MAC/no-IP  & a set of MAC/IP routes & then someone just withdraws the MAC/no-IP.  It does not seem very logical that the MAC/IP routes are still valid to me or at least that could be emphasized in the draft that they do (i.e. all routes are truly independent).

2.      Since we have mac based disposition there is nothing that prevents a neighbor to advertise multiple MAC/IP routes with different labels.  It should obviously not imply that we have to lookup the IP address on the packet (if we even have one) to decide which label is needed.  Should all this labels be considered pointing to the same MAC & equivalent ? Such a condition considered invalid transient and MAC labels for this MAC ignored completely ?  What if we get one route with the label & another without ? We use the label nevertheless for the same MAC ?

And my final interesting observation:

               A single primary/single backup case would be simple & easy, the way the protocol spec stands today, I don't think there is anything that prevents it from operating in  multiple-primaries, multiple-backup mode  (as in two guys clear the single-active bits & all other set them) [unless I misunderstood something massively].   Do we load balance the primaries until both fail & then either flood (multiple backups) or fail back on the secondary ?

Otherwise, very good draft I think solving tons of hard problems in (for the customer and in terms of protocols mechanics) fairly elegant way.

--- tony
From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:sajassi@cisco.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 10:53 PM
To: Jakob Heitz; l2vpn@ietf.org
Cc: Antoni Przygienda
Subject: Re: MAC route with IP


Yes, but that's the case when that MAC address is associated with other IP addresses per my example below. And as long as there are other ARP entry (or entries) for that MAC address after deleting that IP/MAC pair, the MAC address will remain in the MAC-VRF.

Cheers,
Ali

From: Jakob Heitz <jakob.heitz@ericsson.com<mailto:jakob.heitz@ericsson.com>>
Date: Sunday, May 11, 2014 10:38 PM
To: Cisco Employee <sajassi@cisco.com<mailto:sajassi@cisco.com>>, "l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>" <l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>>
Cc: Antoni Przygienda <antoni.przygienda@ericsson.com<mailto:antoni.przygienda@ericsson.com>>
Subject: RE: MAC route with IP

When the IP address is dissociated with the MAC address, but the MAC address still exits.

Cheers,
Jakob.

From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:sajassi@cisco.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 10:34 PM
To: Jakob Heitz; l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>
Cc: Antoni Przygienda
Subject: Re: MAC route with IP


Hi Jakob,

I believe the currency text is correct and sufficient. What use case do you have in mind?

EVPN PE devices that only do L2 (w/ flooding), only advertise MAC route (w/o IP address) and EVPN PE devices that do L2 w/ ARP suppression, advertise both MAC and IP. In the latter case, if there are several IP addresses map to the same MAC address, then the MAC address from MAC-VRF only gets removed, when there is no more ARP entry with that MAC address.

Cheers,
Ali

From: Jakob Heitz <jakob.heitz@ericsson.com<mailto:jakob.heitz@ericsson.com>>
Date: Sunday, May 11, 2014 9:56 PM
To: "l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>" <l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>>
Cc: Antoni Przygienda <antoni.przygienda@ericsson.com<mailto:antoni.przygienda@ericsson.com>>
Subject: MAC route with IP

We have another issue
In section 10: ARP and ND, the draft says:

   If there are multiple IP addresses associated with a MAC address,
   then multiple MAC advertisement routes MUST be generated, one for
   each IP address. For instance, this may be the case when there are
   both an IPv4 and an IPv6 address associated with the MAC address.


   When the IP address is dissociated with the MAC address, then the MAC

   advertisement route with that particular IP address MUST be

   withdrawn.

If such a route is withdrawn and no MAC route without IP exists, then the MAC address will be forgotten. Therefore, we would like to add a sentence:

Whenever a PE advertises one or more MAC advertisement routes with IP address for a particular MAC address, it MUST also advertise one MAC advertisement route without an IP address for that MAC address.

Thanks,
Jakob.