Re: [bess] [Idr] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay vs. draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps

Fully agree John. That's what I meant, sorry if I didn't make myself clear. Section 9 needs clean up, yes. Thanks, Jorge _ From: EXT John E Drake > Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2016 23:34 Subject: RE: [Idr]

Re: [bess] [Idr] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay vs. draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps

Hi Jorge, As per the current spec that is correct - it is being used only for vlan-aware bundle model. For vlan-based, if a system supports more than 64K vlans, keeping Etag zero forces implementation to create new RDs. The current IP address based RD structure only has 16 bits left in RD for

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

Yes/support Best Regards Bertrand Duvivier https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLcSD8Cbk0fFHTO4bnb3NC8pJka3_ZvoRY On 04/05/16 20:17, "Jeff Tantsura" wrote: >Yes/support > > > > >On 5/4/16, 7:18 AM, "BESS on behalf of Thomas Morin" >

Re: [bess] [Idr] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay vs. draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps

Thomas and Jorge, Snipped, comments inline. Yours Irrespectively, John > > > >draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay (see section 9) relies on the BGP > >Encapsulation extended to encode the tunnel encap to use for BUM > >traffic, but contrary to other E-VPN routes, relies on the Ethernet Tag > >field

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

Yes/support On 5/4/16, 7:17 AM, "BESS on behalf of Thomas Morin" 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

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

Thomas, I support adopting this as a WG draft, it’s excellent work. Cheers, Andy On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Thomas Morin wrote: > Hello working group, > > This email starts a two-week poll on adopting > draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-yang [1] as a working group

[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

[bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay vs. draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps

Hi, There are minor things that could be improved in draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay wrt. consistency with draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps : * since draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps will deprecate RFC5512, it would be better that draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay refers to draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps

[bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping-05.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS of the IETF. Title : Multicast VPN state damping Authors : Thomas Morin Stephane Litkowski

Re: [bess] Do 4PE routers need both IPv4 and IPv6 next hop information?

Thank you very much for your perfect picture. The problem is that the 4PE router only has one routing table for IPv4 routes including the routes learned from other 4PE routers and those learned from v4 peering routers. However, these two kinds of IPv4 routes have different NLRI format. Does