IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [L3sm] Comments on draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model

<stephane.litkowski@orange.com> Fri, 31 July 2015 11:19 UTC

Return-Path: <stephane.litkowski@orange.com>
X-Original-To: l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75AB31A07BC for <l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 04:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 LbZJcn-E_9I5 for <l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 04:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias91.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B8C01A070E for <l3sm@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 04:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfedm08.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.4]) by omfedm09.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id E8A362DC0EE; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:19:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [10.114.31.24]) by omfedm08.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id CC5D423805E; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:19:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::65de:2f08:41e6:ebbe]) by OPEXCLILM7D.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::9044:c5ee:4dd2:4f16%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:19:18 +0200
From: stephane.litkowski@orange.com
To: Eric C Rosen <erosen@juniper.net>, "l3sm@ietf.org" <l3sm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [L3sm] Comments on draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model
Thread-Index: AQHQw8X3K3YLZClNO0qpeZYxRBC/cp3nugYAgADZWqCAAL2YgIAFtW5AgAHmOwCABJDzUA==
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:19:18 +0000
Message-ID: <10406_1438341558_55BB59B6_10406_52_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166BAF97@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <4B3B6546-2150-4EFB-B580-587A9EAD1E82@gmail.com> <55AFE9C4.5070704@juniper.net> <29351_1437643806_55B0B41E_29351_10618_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166A402F@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <55B13F23.4030001@juniper.net> <12269_1437986269_55B5EDDD_12269_740_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166A4D53@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <55B7A0F4.8050007@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <55B7A0F4.8050007@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.1]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 6.2.1.2478543, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2015.7.16.85415
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l3sm/fVA2K-t1ECmordsCS5fpt5PAiQY>
Subject: Re: [L3sm] Comments on draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model
X-BeenThere: l3sm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: L3VPN Service YANG Model discussion group <l3sm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l3sm>, <mailto:l3sm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/l3sm/>
List-Post: <mailto:l3sm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l3sm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3sm>, <mailto:l3sm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:19:22 -0000

Agree, we will find a way to express it from an abstraction point of view. Do you have already something in mind ?

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric C Rosen [mailto:erosen@juniper.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 17:34
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane SCE/IBNF; l3sm@ietf.org
Cc: erosen@juniper.net
Subject: Re: [L3sm] Comments on draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model

On 7/27/2015 4:37 AM, stephane.litkowski@orange.com wrote:
> [SLI] in my mind, if the referenced IP address is an IP address 
> located on a PE, then the RP is the PE.

If the referenced address is any anycast address, how do you know whether it is "located on a PE" or not?  I'd have thought that the decision to assign the anycast address to the RP is based on whether or not you are offering the RP-as-PE service to the customer.

Similarly, if you are offering BIDIR-PIM support to a customer by using the technique of section 11.1 of RFC6513, I don't think it's enough just to specify the RPA in the service model; you have to have some information that determines whether or not the PE has to advertise to the CE a route to the RPA.


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email