Re: BFD for vxlan Destination MAC field (was Re: draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan IESG status)

[Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>]

Greg,

Sorry, I was looking at two messages back to back.  From a unicast from Donald:

> I'm still working on catching up on the MAC address aspects of this
> discussion so this message may have been overcome by events.
> 
> But individual MAC addresses are abundant. I received a request from
> IANA in connection with the -07 version of this draft on 22 May 2019
> (yes 2019). I reviewed the draft the same day and sent back an
> approval to IANA to assign a MAC address in which I suggested the
> value 00-00-5E-00-52-02 which is still available according to the IANA
> registry. Presumably IANA will make that assignment as soon as the
> IESG approves the draft.



-- Jeff


> On Aug 10, 2020, at 3:38 PM, Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jeff,
> to update the IANA considerations section by replacing TBD1 with the actual MAC address? I see two small allocation ranges for in the Unicast MAC addresses:
> 00-52-02 to 00-52-12 Unassigned (small allocations) 
> ....
> 00-52-14 to 00-52-FF Unassigned (small allocations)
> 
> Also, can we change the wording in the Reference column from "BFD over VXLAN" to "Control channel in NVO3"? That would be helpful to the work on OAM in Geneve.
> 
> Regards,
> Greg
> 
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:14 PM Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> Thank you, Donald.
> 
> Greg, would you bump the draft with this assignment?
> 
> -- Jeff
> 
> 
> > On Aug 10, 2020, at 1:08 PM, Donald Eastlake <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > My apologies for not responding earlier in this thread.
> > 
> > IANA originally contacted me as a Designated Expert for MAC addresses
> > under the IANA OUI last year in connection with version -07. At that
> > time, I approved an assignment for this draft. I'm fine with any
> > reasonable usage description the WG comes up with for this MAC address
> > whether more or less generic. (Usage of a MAC address reserved for
> > documentation would not be appropriate)
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Donald
> > ===============================
> > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
> > 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
> > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 7:55 PM Greg Mirsky <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Hi Jeff,
> >> do you think that the record in the Usage filed for the requested MAC address instead of "BFD over VXLAN" be more generic, e.g., "Active OAM over NVO3"?
> >> What do you think?
> >> 
> >> Regards,
> >> Greg
> >> 
> >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 2:26 PM Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 03:52:14PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> >>>>>> Proposed solution: A MAC value should be chosen that is well known and the
> >>>>>> text would become:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> "Destination MAC: A Management VNI, which does not have any tenants, will
> >>>>>> have no dedicated MAC address for decapsulated traffic.  The value
> >>>>>> X:X:X:X:X
> >>>>>> SHOULD be used in this field."
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> SHOULD might need to be MUST.  Since a partial motivation for permitting
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> flexibility in the specification to NOT use the management VNI is desired=
> >>>>> ,
> >>>>>> MUST might be inappropriate.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>> GIM>> Accepted the suggested text. I agree that the flexibility to not use
> >>>>> the Management VNI is permitted in the specification and thus SHOULD in the
> >>>>> text is consistent with that scenario. How would we pick the MAC address?
> >>>> 
> >>>> I am out of my area of expertise and I was hoping someone in the IESG can offer a fix. :-)  I am copying Donald Eastlake since he's the designated expert for the IANA MAC address block.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Donald, review of the thread may be useful, but tersely the need is to have a well known MAC address that can be placed in this vxlan PDU that is literally a placeholder of "not to be used for forwarding".  The packet arrives at the endpoint and, if not immediately accepted, would be dropped.
> >>>> 
> >>>> If there is no well known MAC that could be used for such a behavior, perhaps an address from the IANA block may be used?
> >>>> 
> >>>> While I suspect the IANA mac documentation range could be used, IANA may not appreciate that.
> >>> 
> >>> Donald is not responding to emails.  Considering I've been similarly bad
> >>> about responding, that's forgivable.  However, in the interest of advancing
> >>> the document, I'd like to make a proposal.
> >>> 
> >>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/ethernet-numbers/ethernet-numbers.xhtml <https://www.iana.org/assignments/ethernet-numbers/ethernet-numbers.xhtml>
> >>> 
> >>> Proposed text:
> >>> 
> >>> : Destination MAC: A Management VNI, which does not have any tenants, will
> >>> : have no dedicated MAC address for decapsulated traffic.  The value
> >>> : [TBD1] SHOULD be used in this field.
> >>> :
> >>> : IANA Considerations:
> >>> :
> >>> : IANA is requested to assign a single MAC address to the value TBD1 from the
> >>> : "IANA Unicast 48-bit MAC Address" registry from the "Unassigned (small
> >>> : allocations)" block.  The Usage field will be "BFD for vxlan" with a
> >>> : Reference field of this document.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> -- Jeff
>