Re: [nvo3] FW: New Version Notification for draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03.txt

Greg,

On a serious note, Ethernet OAM seems a much better fit here, since we are
talking about Layer 2 connectivity.

If that is not acceptable by IETF then I have the following questions:

1)      We know that the outer IP addresses are the addresses of
originating and terminating VTEP. Then Why the inner IP Address is also the
Address of VTEP? Shouldn’t the inner IP addresses represent the originating
and terminating OAM processor?

2)      Similarly shouldn’t the inner MAC should represent the MAC address
of the OAM processor?

3)      Why don’t we define a new Ethertype so we can encapsulate BFD
directly over inner L2? The draft requires multiple IP and UDP headers,
that makes processing very complex.

Thanks

Shahram

*From:* Gregory Mirsky [mailto:gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com]
*Sent:* Monday, May 23, 2016 1:23 PM
*To:* Shahram Davari; Greg Mirsky; Anoop Ghanwani
*Cc:* rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org; rtg-bfd@ietf.org; nvo3@ietf.org
*Subject:* RE: [nvo3] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03.txt

Because this is IETF J

*From:* Rtg-bfd [mailto:rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org <rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org>]
*On Behalf Of *Shahram Davari
*Sent:* Monday, May 23, 2016 1:18 PM
*To:* Greg Mirsky; Anoop Ghanwani
*Cc:* rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org; rtg-bfd@ietf.org; nvo3@ietf.org
*Subject:* RE: [nvo3] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03.txt

Greg,

I am wondering why you are not using Ethernet-OAM over VXLAN rather than
encapsulating BFD in UDP/IP/Ethernet and then encapsulating it in VXLAN?

Thx

Shahram

*From:* Rtg-bfd [mailto:rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Mirsky
*Sent:* Monday, May 23, 2016 12:49 PM
*To:* Anoop Ghanwani
*Cc:* rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org; rtg-bfd@ietf.org; nvo3@ietf.org
*Subject:* Re: [nvo3] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03.txt

Now with the correct OOAM-DT address

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> wrote:

+BFD WG and RTGWG OOAM DT

Hi Anoop,

thank you for your review and the question. The scope of this draft is only
for the VXLAN. The Overlay OAM Desing Team is working on the Requirements,
Gap Analysis and, if there will be required, enhancements and/or new OAM
protocols for BIER, NSH, VXLAN-GPE, GENEVE, and GUE, as defined in its
charter. Would appreciate you review and comments of the two documents the
OOAM-DT already presented in BA meeting:

   - OOAM Requirements
   - OAM for Overlay Networks: Gap analysis

In the latter you'll find the example to demonstrate applicability of BFD
Async mode in BIER domain. As we've discussed, other BFD may be applied to
other overlay networks that I've listed above even though their method of
indication OAM payload may be different from BIER. Would you agree, or
suggest to have another example of BFD?

Regards, Greg

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>
wrote:

Authors,

In section 4.1, you have this:

>>>

   Next Protocol Field in GPE header MUST be set to IPv4 or IPv6.

...

   The BFD packet MUST be carried inside the inner MAC frame of the

   VxLAN packet.  The inner MAC frame carrying the BFD payload has the

   following format:

>>>

These two statements seem to contradict each other.  If the GPE header
indicates IPv4 or IPv6, then how can the BFD packet be encapsulated within
a MAC frame?

Can you please clarify?

Thanks,

Anoop

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:15 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
matthew.bocci@nokia.com> wrote:

Folks

Please could you direct any discussion on this draft to the NVO3 working
group list.

Regards

Matthew

On 18/04/2016, 07:54, "nvo3 on behalf of Vengada Prasad Govindan
(venggovi)" <nvo3-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of venggovi@cisco.com> wrote:

>Hello all,
>  The authors request comments on the draft below.
>Thanks
>Prasad
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org]
>Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 11:33 AM
>To: MALLIK MUDIGONDA (mmudigon) <mmudigon@cisco.com>; Basil Saji
><sbasil@juniper.net>; Greg Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>; Vengada
>Prasad Govindan (venggovi) <venggovi@cisco.com>; Juniper Networks
><santoshpk@juniper.net>; Sudarsan Paragiri <sparagiri@juniper.net>;
>Santosh Pallagatti <santoshpk@juniper.net>; sajibasil@gmail.com
><sbasil@juniper.net>
>Subject: New Version Notification for draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03.txt
>
>
>A new version of I-D, draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03.txt
>has been successfully submitted by Vengada Prasad Govindan and posted to
>the IETF repository.
>
>Name:          draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan
>Revision:      03
>Title:         BFD for VXLAN
>Document date: 2016-04-15
>Group:         Individual Submission
>Pages:         9
>URL:
>https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03.txt
>Status:
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan/
>Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03
>Diff:
>https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-spallagatti-bfd-vxlan-03
>
>Abstract:
>   This document describes use of Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
>   (BFD) protocol for VXLAN .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>tools.ietf.org.
>
>The IETF Secretariat
>
>_______________________________________________
>nvo3 mailing list
>nvo3@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
nvo3@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
nvo3@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3