IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Questions about the draft of "A new Designated Forwarder Election for the EVPN"

"Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <sajassi@cisco.com> Tue, 30 September 2014 04:36 UTC

Return-Path: <sajassi@cisco.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 A5D041A0145 for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 21:36:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -12.836
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.836 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 ruTiVolCyBNp for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 21:36:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E22EC1A013B for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 21:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7626; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1412051813; x=1413261413; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=udXoJSCPm0rbqa5cpz749RDsopHeTSLClMJ1yfFtM2M=; b=hBsLtjK3qwnTMEVLwqTp1kvnRsrh8T80VzGeMuXPk3Byeeza3suEAPjG guT6i1rAlp1Yg3uCfRA6O+5YOsCytIJFxMaLMxBKwmIYB/RPx2TVDEv2p qa3A84eQS0aEDHQxltkeYfx40xYvQT7SCwKBAltSRsmIQx283vaOf6UXn I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ai0FAD0zKlStJA2H/2dsb2JhbABggkgjI4EqBIJ+zm4CGXUWAXuEAwECBIELAQYCEQMBAigFBDAUCQgBAQQBEhuIIwGMQpxGCJYQARePOwERATUKFwGCdIFXBZFli0OMPIkhgiCBQ2yBDzmBAgEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.04,625,1406592000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="82587607"
Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Sep 2014 04:36:50 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com [173.36.12.80]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s8U4aooD008800 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:36:50 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x13.cisco.com ([fe80::5404:b599:9f57:834b]) by xhc-aln-x06.cisco.com ([173.36.12.80]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 23:36:50 -0500
From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <sajassi@cisco.com>
To: Haoweiguo <haoweiguo@huawei.com>, "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Questions about the draft of "A new Designated Forwarder Election for the EVPN"
Thread-Topic: Questions about the draft of "A new Designated Forwarder Election for the EVPN"
Thread-Index: Ac/cVzVI2xbfnFI0SNaQkvamT0+xcgAA58Xl///5GYA=
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:36:49 +0000
Message-ID: <D04F80AD.F0D3F%sajassi@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <DD5FC8DE455C3348B94340C0AB5517334F8069DD@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: 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: [10.21.93.87]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D04F80ADF0D3Fsajassiciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2vpn/_RRZfGth1E6b3YOBhGJKXs695fg
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: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:36:59 -0000

There is no plan to use DRNI for EVPN.

-Ali

From: Haoweiguo <haoweiguo@huawei.com<mailto:haoweiguo@huawei.com>>
Date: Monday, September 29, 2014 at 8:03 PM
To: "l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>" <l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>>
Subject: Questions about the draft of "A new Designated Forwarder Election for the EVPN"


Sorry to repost the email to make it more clear...



Hi Co-authors,
In all-active connection case, to avoid frame duplication and looping, only one exit point among multiple PEs corresponding to a ESI is allowed to egress BUM traffic from EVPN network to local access network . DF election algorithm is a candidated solution. To overcome some DF election drawbacks,this draft proposed a new algorithm to replace DF election algorithm.
IEEE802.1AX,DRNI specs also can meet EVPN active-active connection requirements. Do you have plan to use IEEE existing standard to solve the problem?
Thanks
weiguo
________________________________
发件人: L2vpn [l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org>] 代表 Haoweiguo [haoweiguo@huawei.com<mailto:haoweiguo@huawei.com>]
发送时间: 2014年9月30日 10:37
收件人: l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>
主题: Questions about the draft of "A new Designated Forwarder Election for the EVPN"


Hi Co-authors,
In all-active connection case, to avoid frame duplication and looping, only one exit point multiple PEs corresponding to a ESI is allowed to egress BUM traffic from EVPN network to local access network among . DF election algorithm is a candidated solution. To overcome some DF election drawbacks,this draft proposed a new algorithm to replace DF election algorithm.

IEEE802.1AX,DRNI specs also can meet EVPN active-active connection requirements. Do you have plan to use IEEE existing standard to solve the problem?

Thanks

weiguo

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email