Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-only-gap-02.txt

["Rabadan, Jorge (Jorge)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Wes,

Please see in-line.

-----Original Message-----
From: <George>, Wes <[e-mail]>
Date: Friday, August 29, 2014 at 5:49 AM
To: Jorge Rabadan <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-only-gap-02.txt

>On 8/28/14, 12:52 PM, "Rabadan, Jorge (Jorge)"
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
>>- Minor: EVPN is a separate AFI/SAFI so I would not make it a sub-section
>>of L2VPN, but I would rather put it at the same level. Now that the L2VPN
>>WG will no longer be a WG on its own, I would not classify EVPN as L2VPN
>>anymore. EVPN can even do L3.
>WG] My read was that it was using L2VPN's AFI, but defining a new SAFI, so
>by strict interpretation, it is a subtype of L2VPN. IMHO it's a bit
>hair-splitting either way. The absence or presence of a WG doesn't really
>figure into my thought process when it comes to classification, especially
>with the overall respin of the WGs in Routing Area, but I'm open to
>further discussion if it really needs to be changed.

[JORGE] If the classification is based on the AFI, it is ok. I agree it is
hair-splitting.

>
>>
>>- Why does EVPN inherit RFC 6074 gaps? I don’t see any gap in any of the
>>EVPN defined route types or procedures. I would remove that and keep the
>>dependency on mLDP and RFC 7117 (if any) for the PMSI tunnel attribute
>>that EVPN inherits. Other than that I see no gaps in EVPN.
>WG] good to know I was mostly reading this right. The reason that I said
>that it inherits 6074 gaps is that it can use LDP. Therefore it won't work
>over LDP on an IPv6-only network until the gaps in LDP are fixed, right?
>Or is there something I'm missing that makes that an invalid logical leap?

[JORGE] Right. EVPN can use LDP tunnels as a transport mechanism, so I
would keep the reference to section 3.2.1. However EVPN does not use the
RFC 6074 procedures to discover membership. It takes some procedures from
RFC 7117 but replacing RFC 6074 procedures for its own discovery
mechanisms.
I would then modify the text in this way:
"Because it can use functions in LDP and mLDP it inherits gaps previously
identified in LDP (Section 3.2.1). Once those gaps are resolved, it should
function properly
   on IPv6-only networks as defined.”


Let me know if I am missing something.
Thank you!
 

>
>Thanks!
>
>Wes George
>
>
>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.