[Errata Rejected] RFC7432 (5746)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 17 June 2019 05:46 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99EAB12011B; Sun, 16 Jun 2019 22:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ncJHjzNR6vKU; Sun, 16 Jun 2019 22:46:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4E9A12000E; Sun, 16 Jun 2019 22:46:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 8A1E4B8104A; Sun, 16 Jun 2019 22:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
To: hyztcy@126.com, sajassi@cisco.com, raggarwa_1@yahoo.com, nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com, aisaac71@bloomberg.net, uttaro@att.com, jdrake@juniper.net, wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com
Subject: [Errata Rejected] RFC7432 (5746)
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: martin.vigoureux@nokia.com, iesg@ietf.org, l2vpn@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20190617054551.8A1E4B8104A@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2019 22:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2vpn/y-9NrJM7PEEd_5i0JcxpzkXqfAQ>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 03:12:40 -0700
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 17 Jun 2019 05:46:13 -0000

The following errata report has been rejected for RFC7432,
"BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN".

You may review the report below and at:

Status: Rejected
Type: Technical

Reported by: Yang Huang <hyztcy@126.com>
Date Reported: 2019-06-05
Rejected by: Martin Vigoureux (IESG)

Section: 11.2

Original Text
11.2.  P-Tunnel Identification
"...+ If the PE that originates the advertisement uses ingress 
replication for the P-tunnel for EVPN, the route MUST include the
PMSI Tunnel attribute with the Tunnel Type set to Ingress
Replication and the Tunnel Identifier set to a routable address of
the PE."

Corrected Text
a routable address of the PE is not so strict. And does this mean 
we use the Tunnel Identifier to construct P2P tunnel for ingress 
replication, or we use the Originating Router's IP Address in the 
IMET route key, or they are equivalent meaning?
This may cause interact problems when it implements differently. 
Could you clarify this? Thanks.


   Errata is not the place to ask questions for clarifications

RFC7432 (draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-11)
Title               : BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN
Publication Date    : February 2015
Author(s)           : A. Sajassi, Ed., R. Aggarwal, N. Bitar, A. Isaac, J. Uttaro, J. Drake, W. Henderickx
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG