Re: [bess] Encoding a 20 bit label in a 24 bit field.

[Tapraj Singh (tapsingh)]

Hi 
 Agree with John's suggestion here.

Thanks
Tapraj

On 10/16/18, 5:28 AM, "BESS on behalf of John E Drake"  wrote:

I don't think that's a good idea because depending upon their position in 
the stack, these labels may not be at the bottom of the stack.

Yours Irrespectively,

John

> -Original Message-
> From: BESS  On Behalf Of Zhuangshunwan
> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 9:02 PM
> To: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) ; BESS 
> Subject: Re: [bess] Encoding a 20 bit label in a 24 bit field.
> 
> It is good to make this explicit. This ambiguity has led to some 
unnecessary
> interworking problems.
> 
> Should we also need to explicitly define the "bottom of stack" bit in the 
low-
> order bit of the 3-octet label field?
> 
> Thanks,
> Shunwan
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jakob Heitz 
(jheitz)
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 4:21 AM
> To: BESS 
> Subject: [bess] Encoding a 20 bit label in a 24 bit field.
> 
> We have proposed the following erratum for RFC 7432.
> 
> Opinions?
> 
> Regards,
> Jakob.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: RFC Errata System 
> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 12:37 PM
> To: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) ; raggarw...@yahoo.com;
> nabil.n.bi...@verizon.com; aisaa...@bloomberg.net; utt...@att.com;
> jdr...@juniper.net; wim.henderi...@alcatel-lucent.com; db3...@att.com;
> aretana.i...@gmail.com; martin.vigour...@nokia.com; Giles Heron
> (giheron) ; nabil.n.bi...@verizon.com
> Cc: Krishnamoorthy Arumugham (karumugh) ;
> l2...@ietf.org; rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org
> Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7432 (5523)
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7432, "BGP MPLS-
> Based Ethernet VPN".
> 
> --
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.rfc-
> 2Deditor.org_errata_eid5523&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeM
> K-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH-
> s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=IvOdDW_zoH5heXCCcs7ke0vmlQ0Hm1yCi17llZn
> BdsY&s=n_iX5KAK2InG-bgMnZHO3o4PH9UZmYKVtes9H7-vA1E&e=
> 
> --
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Krishnamoorthy Arumugham 
> 
> Section: 7
> 
> Original Text
> -
> Clarifications to following sub-sections:
> Section 7.1
> Section 7.2
> Section 7.5
> 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --
> Section 7.1:
> Add below text to the section 7.1 regarding the encoding of MPLS label:
> 
> "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits 
of the
> 3 bytes MPLS Label field."
> 
> Section 7.2:
> Add below text to the section 7.2 regarding the encoding of both the MPLS
> label fields:
> 
> "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits 
of the
> 3 bytes MPLS Label field for both MPLS Label1 and MPLS Label2."
> 
> Section 7.5:
> Add below text to the section 7.5 regarding the encoding of ESI Label 
fields:
> 
> "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits 
of the
> ESI Label field."
> 
> 
> Notes
> -
> MPLS label is a 20-bit value and is stored in a 3 bytes field in a 
packet. The 20-
> bit MPLS label value is generally stored in higher order 20 bits of the 3 
byte
> label field. The exact encoding to be followed for storing MPLS label 
values
> are not explicitly mentioned in the RFC 7432 under section 7.1, 7.2 and 
7.5
> for different types of EVPN routes. This lead to ambiguity in different
> implementations. Hence a clarification is required.
> 
> Instructions:
> -
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use
> "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a
> decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status 
and
> edit the report, if necessary.
> 
> --
> RFC7432 (draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-11)
> --
> Title   : BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN
> Publication Date: February 2015
> Author(s)   : A. Sajassi, Ed., R. Aggarwal, N. Bitar, A. Isaac, 
J. Uttaro, J.
> Drake, W. Henderickx
> Category: PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source  : Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks
> Area: Routing
> Stream  : IETF
> Verifying Party : IESG
> 
> ___
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-

Re: [bess] EVPN MH: Backup node behavior in Primary Path Failure

[Tapraj Singh (tapsingh)]

  Agree with John suggestion.

Thanks
Tapraj

From: BESS  on behalf of John E Drake 

Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 5:43 AM
To: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" , 
Zhuangshunwan , Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal 

Cc: "jiang...@ericsson.com" , 
"p.muthu.arul.mo...@ericsson.com" , 
"bess@ietf.org" , "jaikumar.somasunda...@ericsson.com" 

Subject: Re: [bess] EVPN MH: Backup node behavior in Primary Path Failure

Jorge,

The other possibility for this case is for each PE to advertise a Per EVI 
Ethernet A-D route for only those EVIs for which it would become DF if the 
current DF were to fail..

Yours Irrespectively,

John

From: BESS  On Behalf Of Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - 
US/Mountain View)
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 4:56 AM
To: Zhuangshunwan ; Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal 

Cc: jiang...@ericsson.com; p.muthu.arul.mo...@ericsson.com; 
jaikumar..somasunda...@ericsson.com; bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] EVPN MH: Backup node behavior in Primary Path Failure

Hi,

RFC7432 explains that if there are more than 2 PEs in the ES, then, upon 
receiving the AD route withdrawals, the remote PE will flood. That is, it’ll 
flush the MACs and flood since it does not know who the new DF is, and there is 
no backup for a given MAC.

So yes, with more than 2 PEs, there is no backup per se. Note that, even if we 
had the BDF indication, upon an ES failure the remote PE will start receiving 
MAC/IP route withdrawals. Hence unless the re advertisements of the MACs start 
coming immediately, the BDF indication may not avoid flooding anyway.. We can 
add the P and B bits here too, but they may not be as useful as in RFC8214.

Thanks,
Jorge



From: Zhuangshunwan mailto:zhuangshun...@huawei.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 00:19
To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View); Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal
Cc: jiang...@ericsson.com; 
p.muthu.arul.mo...@ericsson.com; 
bess@ietf.org; 
jaikumar.somasunda...@ericsson.com
Subject: RE: [bess] EVPN MH: Backup node behavior in Primary Path Failure

Hi Jorge,

8.4.  Aliasing and Backup Path of RFC7432 says:


.   The backup path is a closely related function, but it is used in
.   Single-Active redundancy mode.  In this case, a PE also advertises
.   that it has reachability to a given EVI/ES using the same combination
.   of Ethernet A-D per EVI route and Ethernet A-D per ES route as
.   discussed above, but with the "Single-Active" bit in the flags of the
.   ESI Label extended community set to 1.  A remote PE that receives a
.   MAC/IP Advertisement route with a non-reserved ESI SHOULD consider
.   the advertised MAC address to be reachable via any PE that has
.   advertised this combination of Ethernet A-D routes, and it SHOULD
.   install a backup path for that MAC address.


Actually, do we think that the function described in this section only works 
when there are only 2 PEs in one ES?
When there are more than 2 PEs in one ES, it cannot work unless RFC7432 also 
introduce the BDF election function defined in RFC8214.

Regards,
Shunwan

From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf OfRabadan, Jorge (Nokia - 
US/Mountain View)
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2018 2:01 PM
To: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal mailto:muthu.a...@gmail.com>>
Cc: jiang...@ericsson.com; 
p.muthu.arul.mo...@ericsson.com; 
bess@ietf.org; 
jaikumar.somasunda...@ericsson.com
Subject: Re: [bess] EVPN MH: Backup node behavior in Primary Path Failure

That should be true only in RFC8214. That’s my point…

From:Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal 
mailto:muthu.a...@gmail.com>>
Date: Friday, October 5, 2018 at 5:47 AM
To: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" 
mailto:jorge.raba...@nokia.com>>
Cc: 
"jaikumar.somasunda...@ericsson.com" 
mailto:jaikumar.somasunda...@ericsson.com>>,
 "bess@ietf.org" mailto:bess@ietf.org>>, 
"jiang...@ericsson.com" 
mailto:jiang...@ericsson.com>>, 
"p.muthu.arul...mo...@ericsson.com" 
mailto:p.muthu.arul.mo...@ericsson.com>>
Subject: Re: [bess] EVPN MH: Backup node behavior in Primary Path Failure

Thanks, Jorge.

In EVPN single-active dual-homing or EVPN VPWS single-active multi-homing, when 
other PEs realize that the DF is dead, they all need to re-run the DF election 
for sure. However, traffic recovery need not wait until the DF election gets 
over electing a new DF..it only requires the other PEs and the backup to 
realize the primary/DF is dead and start forward. That's my point..

Regards,
Muthu

On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 1:30 AM Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) 
mailto:jorge.raba...@nokia.com>> wrote:
Muthu,


From:Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal 
mailto:

Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang

[Tapraj Singh (tapsingh)]

Resending due to mail delivery messages

Support as co-author

Not aware of any relevant IPR

Thanks,
Tapraj



On 5/5/16, 9:43 AM, "Tapraj Singh (tapsingh)"  wrote:

>As a co-author, I support this draft.
>
>
>Thanks
>Tapraj
>
>On 5/5/16, 7:48 AM, "BESS on behalf of Shah, Himanshu"
> wrote:
>
>>Support as co-author.
>>I am not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft.
>>
>>Himanshu using iPad (so excuse the auto-corrects...)
>>
>>From: BESS [bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Luay Jalil
>>[luayja...@gmail.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 6:23 AM
>>To: Thomas Morin
>>Cc: BESS; draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-y...@tools.ietf.org
>>Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang
>>
>>Resending due to mail delivery messages
>>
>>Support as co-author
>>
>>Not aware of any relevant IPR
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Luay
>>
>>On May 4, 2016 9:18 AM, "Thomas Morin"
>>mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com>> wrote:
>>Hello working group,
>>
>>This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
>>draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang [1] as a working group document.
>>
>>Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in both cases,
>>please also state the reasons).
>>
>>This poll runs until *May 25th*.
>>
>>This call runs in parallel with the adoption call on
>>draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang hence the extended period.
>>
>>
>>We are *coincidentally* also polling for knowledge of any other
>>IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed
>>in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
>>and 5378 for more details).
>>
>>==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
>>respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
>>relevant IPR.
>>
>>The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from
>>each author and contributor.
>>
>>If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly
>>respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed
>>in conformance with IETF rules.
>>
>>Thank you,
>>
>>Martin & Thomas
>>bess chairs
>>
>>[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang
>>
>>___
>>BESS mailing list
>>BESS@ietf.org<mailto:BESS@ietf.org>
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>>
>>___
>>BESS mailing list
>>BESS@ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang

[Tapraj Singh (tapsingh)]

I support this draft as a co-author and I am not aware of any relevant IPR.



Thanks
Tapraj

On 5/23/16, 7:57 AM, "BESS on behalf of Kishore Tiruveedhula"
 wrote:

>
>I support this draft as a co-author and I am not aware of any relevant
>IPR.
>
>Thanks,
>Kishore
>
>
>
>
>On 5/10/16, 10:56 AM, "BESS on behalf of Xufeng Liu"
> wrote:
>
>>Support.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>- Xufeng
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2016 10:18 AM
>>> To: bess@ietf.org
>>> Cc: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-y...@tools.ietf.org
>>> Subject: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang
>>> 
>>> Hello working group,
>>> 
>>> This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
>>>draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang [1]
>>> as a working group document.
>>> 
>>> Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in both cases,
>>>please also
>>> state the reasons).
>>> 
>>> This poll runs until *May 25th*.
>>> 
>>> This call runs in parallel with the adoption call on
>>>draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang
>>> hence the extended period.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> We are *coincidentally* also polling for knowledge of any other
>>> IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed
>>> in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
>>> and 5378 for more details).
>>> 
>>> ==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
>>> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
>>> relevant IPR.
>>> 
>>> The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from
>>> each author and contributor.
>>> 
>>> If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please
>>> explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet
>>> been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> 
>>> Martin & Thomas
>>> bess chairs
>>> 
>>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> BESS mailing list
>>> BESS@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>>
>>___
>>BESS mailing list
>>BESS@ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang

[Tapraj Singh (tapsingh)]

As a co-author, I support this draft.


Thanks
Tapraj

On 5/5/16, 7:48 AM, "BESS on behalf of Shah, Himanshu"
 wrote:

>Support as co-author.
>I am not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft.
>
>Himanshu using iPad (so excuse the auto-corrects...)
>
>From: BESS [bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Luay Jalil
>[luayja...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 6:23 AM
>To: Thomas Morin
>Cc: BESS; draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-y...@tools.ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang
>
>Resending due to mail delivery messages
>
>Support as co-author
>
>Not aware of any relevant IPR
>
>Thanks,
>Luay
>
>On May 4, 2016 9:18 AM, "Thomas Morin"
>mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com>> wrote:
>Hello working group,
>
>This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
>draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang [1] as a working group document.
>
>Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in both cases,
>please also state the reasons).
>
>This poll runs until *May 25th*.
>
>This call runs in parallel with the adoption call on
>draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang hence the extended period.
>
>
>We are *coincidentally* also polling for knowledge of any other
>IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed
>in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
>and 5378 for more details).
>
>==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
>respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
>relevant IPR.
>
>The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from
>each author and contributor.
>
>If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly
>respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed
>in conformance with IETF rules.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Martin & Thomas
>bess chairs
>
>[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang

[Tapraj Singh (tapsingh)]

Hi Thomas,
  As a co-author, I support this draft.

Thanks
Tapraj

On 5/5/16, 7:52 AM, "BESS on behalf of Shah, Himanshu"
 wrote:

>I support this draft for WG adoption and am not aware
>Of any IPR that applies to this draft.
>
>Himanshu using iPad (so excuse the auto-corrects...)
>
>From: BESS [bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Patrice Brissette
>(pbrisset) [pbris...@cisco.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 3:55 PM
>To: Thomas Morin; bess@ietf.org
>Cc: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-y...@tools.ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang
>
>Thomas,
>
>As a co-author, I support this draft.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Patrice
>
>   Patrice Brissette
>TECHNICAL LEADER.ENGINEERING
>
>pbris...@cisco.com
>Phone: +1 613 254 3336
>
>Cisco Systems Canada Co. / Les Systemes Cisco Canada CIE
>Canada
>Cisco.com 
>
> Think before you print.This
> email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use
> of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure
>by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient
>(or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender
>by reply email and delete all copies of this message.
>Please click here
> for
>Company Registration Information.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On 2016-05-04, 10:18 AM, "BESS on behalf of Thomas Morin"
> wrote:
>
>>Hello working group,
>>
>>This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
>>draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang [1] as a working group document.
>>
>>Please state on the list if you support adoption or not (in both cases,
>>please also state the reasons).
>>
>>This poll runs until *May 25th*.
>>
>>This call runs in parallel with the adoption call on
>>draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang hence the extended period.
>>
>>
>>We are *coincidentally* also polling for knowledge of any other
>>IPR that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed
>>in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669
>>and 5378 for more details).
>>
>>==> *If* you are listed as a document author or contributor please
>>respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
>>relevant IPR.
>>
>>The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received from
>>each author and contributor.
>>
>>If you are not listed as an author or contributor, then please
>>explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet
>>been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
>>
>>Thank you,
>>
>>Martin & Thomas
>>bess chairs
>>
>>[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-brissette-bess-evpn-yang
>>
>>___
>>BESS mailing list
>>BESS@ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
>___
>BESS mailing list
>BESS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess