Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt
"Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <sajassi@cisco.com> Thu, 27 September 2012 18:45 UTC
Return-Path: <sajassi@cisco.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 7C39C21F86A2 for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.549
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H5GHc8c-zE7z for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.86.78]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ABED21F8698 for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=11982; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1348771554; x=1349981154; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=hkfwxgvOYMzLdrHTp46JZTgRLXZSro2iLQiZHwFmWmo=; b=VBnfxlu/WPCso41Jg2fIjtNMHFeJ/rLK3x+djBsgo6mUmtYpuKMhJ8T9 KUeCy7yURXxqwIG6x94diAqptFzdRkWmCczA/RP5j5HnoTcwq4iI/reCm XR+5Op+amD00iMzxk4juI7cJ3mfRDvoCg4qtaZXDsoPdJuS28+j9pNvt5 g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFABKeZFCtJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABFgm67HIEIgiABAQEEEgEnMwUFAgwGAQgRBAEBAR4JKBEUCQgCBAENBQkSB4dRAw8BCphyli4NiVSKNmIUBoYDA5QUgVWBFYoLgyKBaYJngVoJNA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,496,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="126066147"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Sep 2012 18:45:53 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com [173.37.183.79]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8RIjq7B013728 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:45:53 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x13.cisco.com ([fe80::5404:b599:9f57:834b]) by xhc-rcd-x05.cisco.com ([173.37.183.79]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 13:45:52 -0500
From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <sajassi@cisco.com>
To: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>, Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>, "UTTARO, JAMES" <ju1738@att.com>, "'Rogers, Josh'" <josh.rogers@twcable.com>, Aldrin Isaac <aldrin.isaac@gmail.com>, Giles Heron <giles.heron@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHNnOBR9sc2i81O+0epLnx+Dd1A3Q==
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:45:51 +0000
Message-ID: <CC89EBC1.1B7C1%sajassi@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <F9336571731ADE42A5397FC831CEAA020BA804FC@ILPTWPVEXMB03.ecitele.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.1.120420
x-originating-ip: [10.128.2.115]
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19214.004
x-tm-as-result: No--74.256400-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <0921DD14F780734CA2C39A90B3587D8F@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <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: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:45:55 -0000
Sasha, There is no notion of PWs E-VPN. E-VPN operation is analogous to IP-VPN. Regarding the OAM aspects, the work has already started and it will be covered separately. Since E-VPN covers many applications such as VPLS, VPWS, E-TREE/VPMS, DCI, DCN/cloud, its corresponding OAM MUST cover all these applications well. Cheers, Ali On 9/26/12 7:45 AM, "Alexander Vainshtein" <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> wrote: >Yuanlong, Ali, and all, > >I think that we have really 3 aspects of E-Tree that should be explicitly >presented for each solution approach: > >1. Change of the PE Type: > - Root-only to Mixed and vice versa > - Leaf-only to Mixed and vice versa > - Root-only to Leaf-only and vice versa >2. OAM - how it is supposed to work and how the defects it detects are >handled. > This becomes non-trivial in the 2PW solution and its analogs if one >of the two PWsfails IMHO >3. Interworking with Ethernet-only E-Tree. > >My 2c, > Sasha > > >________________________________________ >From: l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org [l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of >Jiangyuanlong [jiangyuanlong@huawei.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 11:31 AM >To: Ali Sajassi (sajassi); UTTARO, JAMES; 'Rogers, Josh'; Aldrin Isaac; >Giles Heron >Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org >Subject: RE: New Version Notification for >draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt > >Ali, > >On the one hand, you said E-VPN solution doesn't have the limitation of >data-plane forwarding and inherently support E-Tree, on the other hand, >you agreed that 2 labels are introduced specially for E-Tree for these >two cases. Furthermore, forwarding behaviors for these two labels are >different (for root label, split horizon + forward to both root & leaf >ports; for leaf label, split horizon + forward only to leaf ports) from >the E-VPN itself (split horizon only). >But my main concern is whether OAM is needed for E-VPN, if yes, how it >can be implemented in practical? > >Regards, >Yuanlong > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:sajassi@cisco.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 2:15 PM >To: Jiangyuanlong; UTTARO, JAMES; 'Rogers, Josh'; Aldrin Isaac; Giles >Heron >Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org >Subject: Re: New Version Notification for >draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt > > > >Hi Yuanlong, > >If one understood the operation of SH filtering in E-VPN, he would have >seen that it exactly covers both of these cases that are mentioned below. > >Also, E-VPN allows for policy-based forwarding on a per MAC basis without >scale issue. As I said previously, I won't be able to provide E-VPN >tutorial over the email. > >Cheers, >Ali > >On 9/25/12 12:02 AM, "Jiangyuanlong" <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com> wrote: > >>Hi all, >> >>I don't think E-VPN control plane can solve all the problem of E-Tree. >>For the following two scenarios data plane indication of E-Tree is >>needed: >>1. Per EVI label is assigned, and there are multiple PEs with both Leaf >>AND Root sites; >>2. Per <ESI, Ethernet Tag> label is assigned, and there are multiple >>Ethernet segments with both Leaf AND Root sites; >>Using 2 labels (EVI MPLS label or ESI MPLS label respectively) is an >>option, but maybe OAM is a challenge. >> >>Assigning label per MAC for E-Tree will not need this indication, but at >>expense of scalability. >> >>Regards, >>Yuanlong >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:sajassi@cisco.com] >>Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:42 AM >>To: UTTARO, JAMES; 'Rogers, Josh'; Aldrin Isaac; Giles Heron >>Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org; Jiangyuanlong >>Subject: Re: New Version Notification for >>draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt >> >> >>Jim, Aldrin, Josh: >> >>You guys are spot on. E-VPN solution doesn't have the limitation of >>data-plane forwarding that VPLS has and as such it doesn't need addition >>vlan-tag to solve root/leaf indication issue as it can be supported >>inherently by the solution. >> >>Cheers, >>Ali >> >>On 9/22/12 4:34 PM, "UTTARO, JAMES" <ju1738@att.com> wrote: >> >>>Josh, >>> >>> Yes.. I think that is the reality of it.. VPLS either the LDP or >>>BGP >>>variety uses data plane learning as the mechanism to "learn".. The fact >>>that we extend the L2 footprint via these "tunnels" does not change that >>>fact.. SO in VPLS the only hammer you have is the data plane, so one >>>must >>>manipulate bits on the wire to infer topology ( Limited set of topology >>>).. >>> >>>Another challenge is when roots and leafs "land" on the same PE. >>> >>>EVPN is intended to use contexts and associated import/export to manage >>>the topology.. So here there is a set of tools to create the desired >>>topologies, along with that there other mechanisms realized i.e >>>active/active... >>> >>>Jim Uttaro >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf >>>Of >>>Rogers, Josh >>>Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 7:03 PM >>>To: UTTARO, JAMES; Aldrin Isaac; Giles Heron >>>Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org; Jiangyuanlong >>>Subject: Re: New Version Notification for >>>draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt >>> >>>I agree. >>> >>>Would it be safe to state that VPLS has a need for a 'etree solution', >>>but >>>EVPN does not, because it is inherently supported? >>> >>>The previously discussed effort of having a 'single etree solution' for >>>both VPLS and EVPN may not really be valid due to this. >>> >>>In fact, I do not think it is valid to ask for a single solution, EVPN >>>doesn't have a problem that needs to be fixed here, I don't believe it >>>factors into this discussion. >>> >>>-Josh >>> >>> >>>On 9/22/12 4:56 PM, "UTTARO, JAMES" <ju1738@att.com> wrote: >>> >>>>EVPN is intended to maximize the flexibility of multiple routing >>>>contexts >>>>with arbitrary topologies.. As I have stated in the past, EVPN allows >>>>for >>>>E-Tree to be constructed in the control plane, other solutions require >>>>some method to interrogate data and infer topology. IMO this is not >>>>desirable. >>>> >>>>Jim Uttaro >>>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf >>>>Of >>>>Rogers, Josh >>>>Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 12:49 PM >>>>To: Aldrin Isaac; Giles Heron >>>>Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org; Jiangyuanlong >>>>Subject: Re: New Version Notification for >>>>draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt >>>> >>>>So, this same sort of 'import/export' of targets is possible using >>>>BGP-VPLS today, but it faces limitations outlined in >>>>draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk, in section 2. E-VPN would be able to >>>>import/export by attachment circuit, and not by PE? Meaning, AC1 one >>>>PE1 >>>>may import RTA, while AC2 on PE2 may import RTB? >>>> >>>>Its occurred to me that EVPN would be able to use other mechanisms that >>>>have not yet been discussed yet due to sharing a mac table over BGP. >>>> >>>>Thanks for the response, >>>>Josh >>>> >>>> >>>>On 9/22/12 10:28 AM, "Aldrin Isaac" <aldrin.isaac@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>In E-VPN an E-tree would be implemented as a hub-and-spoke VPN (like >>>>>as >>>>>in a hub-and-spoke IPVPN, i.e. import RTA export RTB at hubs, import >>>>>RTB >>>>>export RTA at spokes) with filtering to enforce downstream data flow >>>>>if >>>>>desired. The tree could be built using PIM, mLDP, RSVP, etc. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>On Sep 21, 2012, at 9:09 AM, Giles Heron wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks Yuanlong, >>>>>> >>>>>> however I must say that your memory of the IETF 84 L2VPN meeting >>>>>>differs from mine (and from what is noted in the minutes). Whilst >>>>>>Himanshu said that it was better to have the same solution for VPLS >>>>>>and >>>>>>E-VPN, Ali stated that there was no benefit in the E-VPN case in >>>>>>using >>>>>>an additional tag (such as a VLAN). No consensus was reached in the >>>>>>meeting. >>>>>> >>>>>> Giles >>>>>> >>>>>> On 21 Sep 2012, at 10:16, Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com> >>>>>>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> During the 84th IETF meeting, the group discussed the issue of >>>>>>>E-Tree >>>>>>>in E-VPN, and it was shown that a single solution was more preferred >>>>>>>than two different approaches for VPLS and E-VPN. >>>>>>> This I-D probes how the 2VLAN approach can be used to support >>>>>>>E-Tree >>>>>>>in E-VPN and it seems not a big issue. >>>>>>> Any comments from you are greatly appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Yuanlong >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] >>>>>>> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 4:55 PM >>>>>>> To: Jiangyuanlong >>>>>>> Subject: New Version Notification for >>>>>>>draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A new version of I-D, draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00.txt >>>>>>> has been successfully submitted by Yuanlong Jiang and posted to the >>>>>>> IETF repository. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Filename: draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan >>>>>>> Revision: 00 >>>>>>> Title: E-Tree Support with 2VLAN in E-VPN >>>>>>> Creation date: 2012-09-21 >>>>>>> WG ID: Individual Submission >>>>>>> Number of pages: 6 >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vl >>>>>>>a >>>>>>>n >>>>>>>- >>>>>>>0 >>>>>>>0.txt >>>>>>> Status: >>>>>>>http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan >>>>>>> Htmlized: >>>>>>>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jiang-l2vpn-evpn-etree-2vlan-00 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Abstract: >>>>>>> This document discusses how the Dual-VLAN approach as described in >>>>>>> [Etree-vlan] can be used to support the transport of E-Tree >>>>>>>service >>>>>>> in E-VPN. Thus a single convergent solution is possible for both >>>>>>>VPLS >>>>>>> and E-VPN. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The IETF Secretariat >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable >>>>proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject >>>>to >>>>copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended >>>>solely >>>>for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If >>>>you >>>>are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified >>>>that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in >>>>relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly >>>>prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in >>>>error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the >>>>original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. >>> >>> >>>This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable >>>proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject >>>to >>>copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely >>>for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you >>>are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified >>>that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in >>>relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly >>>prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in >>>error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the >>>original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. >> > >This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains >information which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI >Telecom. If you have received this transmission in error, please inform >us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original and all copies >thereof. >
- FW: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Giles Heron
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Aldrin Isaac
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Rogers, Josh
- Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-… Aldrin Isaac
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Rogers, Josh
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… UTTARO, JAMES
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Rogers, Josh
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… UTTARO, JAMES
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-… Aldrin Isaac
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- RE: FW: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-… Jiangyuanlong
- Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-… Aldrin Isaac
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Alexander Vainshtein
- RE: FW: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-… Jiangyuanlong
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Alexander Vainshtein
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Alexander Vainshtein
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Alexander Vainshtein
- RE: FW: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-… UTTARO, JAMES
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… UTTARO, JAMES
- RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Jiangyuanlong
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-l2vp… Ali Sajassi (sajassi)