IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Rift] comments on draft-head-rift-auto-evpn-00

zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn Wed, 10 March 2021 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: rift@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rift@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E9A3A1130 for <rift@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:31:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.918
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.918 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 IEE38EDt0O3p for <rift@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:31:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AC703A112A for <rift@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:31:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.164.215]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 47C4A2CE4BB480C080A7; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 23:31:19 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.238]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 2D7D8D08550829BD1BB5; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 23:31:19 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp04.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.203]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 12AFVBkW062236; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 23:31:11 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid203; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 23:31:10 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 23:31:10 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa6048e63e09f0ad4c
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202103102331103618957@zte.com.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn
To: prz@juniper.net, jhead@juniper.net, wlin@juniper.net
Cc: rift@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn 12AFVBkW062236
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rift/OIQdoFc9s-xMOjOkJgOff28-NJ8>
Subject: [Rift] comments on draft-head-rift-auto-evpn-00
X-BeenThere: rift@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of Routing in Fat Trees <rift.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rift>, <mailto:rift-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rift/>
List-Post: <mailto:rift@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rift-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rift>, <mailto:rift-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:31:26 -0000

Hi Tony, co-author, 


Thank for your presentation in RIFT and BESS WG.


I have question about the intent of this draft, before I read more on the detail. :-P



From the draft, seems like the leaf node will build BGP connection automatically, and exchange the necessary MAC/IP through EVPN advertisement. 


But does the info on leaf for BGP building (AS, router-id, etc.) derived from the leaf node itself? If it is, the BGP auto discovery function is included in (That is also the confusion from BESS WG).


If the info for BGP building on leaf comes from the TOF nodes (RR), then it has no relationship with BGP auto discovery, IMO necessary sourcebound KVs are needed. But I am not sure because I have not seen explicit description in the draft. 


Best regards,


Sandy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email