Hi Anand, The RPC has deleted the duplicate report in favor of EID 9001.
Thank you! Madison Church RFC Production Center > On Jun 11, 2026, at 3:20 PM, Anand Narayanan > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi All: > > Apologies for the duplicate entry. We can reject this in favor of Errata#9001 > > Thanks > Anand > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 1:06 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9721, > "Extended Mobility Procedures for Ethernet VPN Integrated Routing and > Bridging (EVPN-IRB)" > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://errata.rfc-editor.org/eid9002/ > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Anand Narayanan <[email protected]> > > Section Abstract says: > > Original Text > ------------- > The extensions are backward compatible with existing EVPN-IRB implementations > and aim to optimize network performance in scenarios involving frequent IP > address mobility. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > The extensions while backwards incompatible, allow EVPN-IRB implementations > to deterministically handle scenarios involving frequent IP address mobility > > Notes > ----- > The mobility procedures defined in RFC9721 does not seem backwards compatible > with the procedures defined in RFC7432. > > Example: > > Premise: > > 1. An RFC7432 speaker has MAC Mx with sequence number = 1 > 2. An RFC9721 speaker has MAC My with sequence number = 2 > > Sequence of Events: > > 1. The RFC9721 speaker learns a local ARP for IPx-My, and advertised MAC-IP > route with sequence number 2 > 2. IPx moves to be behind RFC7432 speaker > 3. RFC7432 speaker would simply advertise IPx-Mx with sequence number 1 > 4. When RFC9721 speaker receives the MAC-IP route advertised by RFC7432 for > IPx-Mx, it will be unable to remove it's local ARP binding because the remote > route has an inferior sequence number. > > This makes the schemes not compatible with each other. > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". Please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC9721 (draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-extended-mobility) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Extended Mobility Procedures for Ethernet VPN > Integrated Routing and Bridging (EVPN-IRB) > Publication Date : April 2025 > Author(s) : N. Malhotra, Ed., A. Sajassi, A. Pattekar, J. Rabadan, > A. Lingala, J. Drake > Category : Proposed Standard > Source : bess (rtg) > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
