Hi Satoru, Thanks for your reply. My further comments are inline.
Regards, Behcet On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:06 AM, Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsush...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Behcet, > > Sorry for my late response. Let me try to answer to your questions. > >> Referring to Steps 14 and 15 in Figure 4, in Step 14, Route Update (I >> guess BGP Route Update) is initiated by >> which node and is going to which node? > > As you see step 14 in the sequence, any specific node aren't assumed to > initiate routing update on vEPC side, due to the scope of the draft, EPC-E > router is the receiving node of routing update You mean more than one node can initiate it, my question was which node(s)? > >> In Step 15 you have EPC-E initiating this and it is going towards RTR. Why >> is this not sufficient? i.e. since EPC-E >> can detect mobility? >> Why do you need Step 14? > > The reason of the EPC-E advertise route toward RTR is that EPC-E can > aggregate multiple UE's prefixes into less BGP routes as a part of normal > routing operation within operator's network. You mean host routes are not needed in the upstream BGP routers? How does that work? >Step 14 makes EPC-E not to > detect mobility directly. I understand that. > >> For the uplink traffic from UE, you seem to assume that it is always >> towards RTR. Could it not be directed to >> another UE? What happens in that case? > > When an EPC-E router has a route for destination of the packet from UE, the > EPC-E router forward the packet to the destination. You mean to another EPC-E? > Otherwise, the packet > would be forwarded along with routing table of the router. > >> You say that >> EPC-E supports the user >> plane functions of SGW and PGW. >> So there is no PGW in your design, I mean no anchor PGW? > > Yes, there're no entities of PGW and SGW in terms of user-plane. Also in the > routing point of view, since a cluster of EPC-Es share same UE routes set, > each of them can be an anchor. > >> What happens to the control plane functions of SGW and PGW? Where are >> they? > > In terms of control-plane, they are expected to exist in the vEPC. You can > see another benefit for that in section 4.2 of the draft. > > cheers, > --satoru > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 6:25 AM, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi Matsushima-san, >> >> I have some other questions on your draft. >> >> Referring to Steps 14 and 15 in Figure 4, in Step 14, Route Update (I >> guess BGP Route Update) is initiated by which node and is going to which >> node? >> >> In Step 15 you have EPC-E initiating this and it is going towards RTR. Why >> is this not sufficient? i.e. since EPC-E can detect mobility? >> >> Why do you need Step 14? >> >> For the uplink traffic from UE, you seem to assume that it is always >> towards RTR. Could it not be directed to another UE? What happens in that >> case? >> >> You say that >> EPC-E supports the user >> plane functions of SGW and PGW. >> >> So there is no PGW in your design, I mean no anchor PGW? >> >> What happens to the control plane functions of SGW and PGW? Where are >> they? >> >> Regards, >> >> Behcet > > _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
