IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Teas] Discussion on Control Plane Considerations for Enhanced VPN (draft-dong-teas-enhanced-vpn-control-plane)

Takuya Miyasaka <ta-miyasaka@kddi-research.jp> Thu, 07 November 2019 01:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ta-miyasaka@kddi-research.jp>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C98251200F3; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 17:24:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 VTEdTQn7FLun; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 17:24:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp (mandala.kddilabs.jp [192.26.91.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA26120045; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 17:24:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 394FBC1B1840; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 10:24:21 +0900 (JST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kddi-research.jp
Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E0wdDpgV-LgM; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 10:24:19 +0900 (JST)
Received: from safeattach.localdomain (unknown [IPv6:2001:200:601:1a00:20c:29ff:fe79:2280]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79F4BC1B1850; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 10:24:19 +0900 (JST)
Received: from [172.19.124.101] (dhcp101.west-4f.cn.kddilabs.jp [172.19.124.101]) by safeattach.localdomain with ESMTP id xA71OJx5028773; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 10:24:19 +0900
To: draft-dong-teas-enhanced-vpn-control-plane@ietf.org
Cc: teas@ietf.org
From: Takuya Miyasaka <ta-miyasaka@kddi-research.jp>
Message-ID: <1dc33a97-289a-f4e6-8043-2c0c1472d3f0@kddi-research.jp>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2019 10:24:19 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/9RyhD2fPqdIqRamrnICVHIACqrA>
Subject: [Teas] Discussion on Control Plane Considerations for Enhanced VPN (draft-dong-teas-enhanced-vpn-control-plane)
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2019 01:24:28 -0000

Dear authors of draft-dong-teas-enhanced-vpn-control-plane,

Thanks for introducing this new draft [1] which describes a control 
plane consideration for Enhanced VPN. IMO, this document needs to 
deliver another considerations or technical notes for the way to assign 
a dedicated segment routing SID for a reserved resources on a network node.

Furthermore, as for the distributed control plane (section 3.1), why 
don't you mention the SR-policy 
(draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy)? I think the SR-Policy can be 
a candidate approach for the control plane of Enhanced VPN; especially 
BGP based L3VPN (RFC4364) is utilized for the overlay of Enhanced VPN.

   [1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-teas-enhanced-vpn-control-plane/

Regards,
Takuya

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email