Hi Wei, On my side, I don’t understand the problem statement. Would it be possible to clarify that aspect? The draft seems to provide a solution but there is no explicit text about the what you are trying to solve. Regards, Patrice Brissette, Principal Engineer Cisco Systems
http://e-vpn.io http://go2.cisco.com/evpn From: BESS <bess-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Wei Wang <weiwan...@foxmail.com> Date: Friday, March 12, 2021 at 03:14 To: "linda.dunbar" <linda.dun...@futurewei.com>, "jorge.rabadan" <jorge.raba...@nokia.com> Cc: bess <bess@ietf.org> Subject: [bess] About draft-wang-bess-l3-accessible-evpn Hi Linda and Jorge, Thanks for your comments at IETF110 meeting, and I think I need to explain our considerations for the newly defined LSI (Logical Session Identifier) concept. Question 1, from Linda Dunbar, "Is the usage of LSI same as the RD for VPN route distinguish?" Answer: LSI(Logical Session Identifier) is mainly used for distinguishing the different logical sessions between CE and PE device. Such session can be established via Vxlan, IPsec, or other tunnel technologies that can span layer 3 network. The LSI information should be transferred via the control plane and forwarding plane. In control plane, we try to use Ethernet Tag ID/newly defined ESI type to transfer, its purpose is to further distinguish the cusomer routes within one provider VRF. In forwarding plane, this information should be inserted into some place of the exising VxLAN encoding, as proposed in our draft:https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-bess-l3-accessible-evpn-04#section-6.1 Question 2, from Jorge Rabadan. "The ESI shouldn't be used to distinguish the route-type 5, it is mainly used for multi-homing purpose" Answer: Currently, we are considering using two methods to identify the routes that associated different LSI: Method 1: Ethernet Tag ID, which is similar with its usage in layer 2 vlan environment. Method 2: Newly defined ESI type(type 6) We think both methods are approachable: Method 1 requires also the update of https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-11(Ethernet Tag ID is set to 0 for route type 5), may arises some confuse with its original defintion. Method 2 requires the extension of ESI type (as described in: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-bess-l3-accessible-evpn-04#section-6.2). The original purpose of ESI (mulit-homing) can also be preserved. I hope the above explanations help. Comments and questions are always welcome. Best Regards, Wei China Telecom
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
