Hi Ali,
Thank you for your response.
1）If two VIDs on the same physical interface of an ES are getting mapped to
BD1, but the is advertised via Eth AD per EVI route with Eth-tag of
non-zero, can BD1 still be called as VLAN-bundle service interface? I think it
is not VLAN-aware bundle service interface, because these VIDs share the same
bridge table. but section 6.2 of rfc7432bis says that the eth-tag of all EVPN
routes of VLAN-bundle service interface MUST be set to 0, so I think this is
not VLAN-bundle service interface either. Is this use case supported by
rfc7432bis?
2）If two VIDs on a physical interface of ES1 is getting mapped to BD1 and two
VIDs on a physical interface of ES2 is getting mapped to BD1 and BD2
respectively , but both and are advertised via Eth AD
per EVI route with Eth-tag of zero. In such case, that EVI (which contains BD1
and BD2) is VLAN-bundle service interface for ES1, but the same EVI is
VLAN-aware bundle service interface for ES2. Is my understanding correct? I ask
this question because I want to know that whether these "service interface"
concepts are talking about an EVI's character or they just talk about 's character.
3）RFC7209 section 7 says that "[RFC4762] defines two types of VPLS services
based on 'unqualified and qualified learning', which in turn maps to port mode
and VLAN mode, respectively.". But I also noticed that RFC4761 Section 4.2.6
says that "If the key for learning within a VPLS is just the MAC address, then
this VPLS is operating under unqualified learning. If the key for learning is
(customer VLAN tag + MAC address), then this VPLS is operating under qualified
learning."
It seems that the qualified learning of RFC4761 is not VLAN-based service
interface, because the key of that VPLS for MAC learning is ,
which mean that the MAC learning for different C-VLAN is done inside the same
VPLS. But in VLAN-based service interface it is not the case. Otherwise, in
VLAN-aware bundle service interface the MAC learning for different C-VLAN is
done within the same EVI (EVPN VPLS). To me it seems that the qualified
learning of RFC4762 is VLAN-based service interface, but the qualified learning
of RFC4761 is VLAN-aware bundle service interface. Such understanding appears a
little weird to me. But I don't know what's wrong with it. I noticed that the
MAC learning key of RFC4762 is considered to be a "logical key", but the MAC
learning key of RFC4761 is ”the key for learing withing a VPLS“. is the latter
the actual key of that VPLS other than a logical key? Are the "qualified
learning" of RFC4762 and RFC4761 the same with each other?
Thanks,
Yubao
原始邮件
发件人：AliSajassi(sajassi)
收件人：王玉保10045807;draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432...@ietf.org;
抄送人：bess@ietf.org;
日 期 ：2023年05月25日 13:02
主 题 ：Re: Questions on VLAN-based/VLAN-bundle Service Interface of rfc7432bis
If you are talking about different VLAN IDs (VIDs) on the same physical
interface of an ES is getting mapped to a BD, and the is advertised
via Eth AD per EVI route with Eth-tag of zero, then this is VLAN-bundle service
interface. In VLAN bundle, it is assumed that the MAC addresses across
different VIDs are unique and thus they all can be placed in a single BD!
Cheers,
Ali
From: wang.yub...@zte.com.cn
Date: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 7:26 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432...@ietf.org
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: Questions on VLAN-based/VLAN-bundle Service Interface of rfc7432bis
Hi All,
I have encountered a use case that I don't know if it's VLAN-based service
interface or VLAN-bundle service interface.
When two individual subinterfaces on the same ES are attached to the same BD
which is the only one BD (whose Ethernet Tag ID is zero) of its EVI, which
Service Interface should the EVI be called? VLAN-based service interface or
VLAN-bundle service interface or none of those three service itnerfaces?
I noticed that there is just a single A-D per EVI route for that , thus
these two ACs have to share the same A-D per EVI route in such case. So if one
of them fails but the other is OK, should that A-D per EVI route be withdrawn
or not?
When these two interfaces are merged into a single subinterface, I know there
is no doubt that this is VLAN-bundle service interface. But here each VLAN has
its individual interface.
Whether this use case is supported by rfc7432bis? If it is supported, should it
be called VLAN-based service interface or VLAN-bundle service interface?
Thanks,
Yubao___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
