[nvo3] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability-05: (with COMMENT)

Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 27 April 2023 09:09 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability@ietf.org, nvo3-chairs@ietf.org, nvo3@ietf.org, Sam Aldrin <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com>, aldrin.ietf@gmail.com
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <168258656332.28871.14717000274855152275@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 02:09:23 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nvo3/9vd4TTVKgCAeEeDE5cMEcFMApZk>
Subject: [nvo3] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability-05: (with COMMENT)

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability-05: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

Thanks for this document. I only have minor, editorial type comments.

Minor level comments:

(1) p 6, sec 3. Why is EVPN Needed in NVO3 Networks?

Why is a control-plane protocol along with NVO3 tunnels required?
There are three main reasons:

Given that you give an example of why a control-plane protocol isn't required
for the first two, would it be fairer to write 'helpful' or 'useful' rather
than 'required'?

(2) p 23, sec 6. Conventions Used in this Document

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.

It is really unusual to have this boilerplate text need the end of the
document, I don't recall seeing it done in other RFCs. It would probably be
better before the current section 2, or as part of the current section 2.

Nit level comments:

(3) p 6, sec 3. Why is EVPN Needed in NVO3 Networks?

On this architecture and as discussed by [RFC7364], multi-tenant
intra-subnet and inter-subnet connectivity services are provided by
NVO3 tunnels, being VXLAN [RFC7348] or GENEVE [RFC8926] two examples
of such tunnels.

The latter part of the sentence (, being ...) doesn't scan well for me.

(4) p 7, sec 3. Why is EVPN Needed in NVO3 Networks?

* "Flood and learn" solves the issues of auto-discovery and learning
of the MAC to VNI/tunnel IP mapping on the NVEs for a given
Broadcast Domain. However, it does not provide a solution for
advanced features and it does not scale well (mostly due to the
need for constant flooding and the underlay PIM states that are
needed to maintain).

I suggest "must be maintained" rather than "needed to maintain".

Regards,
Rob

[nvo3] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf… Robert Wilton via Datatracker
Re: [nvo3] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-… Jorge Rabadan (Nokia)