Support
Regards
Hooman
From: BESS On Behalf Of Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia -
US/Mountain View)
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 11:17 AM
To: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) ; bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] Second WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-02
I fully support the publication of
Support.
Regards,
Nabeel
> On Sep 24, 2018, at 11:16 AM, Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
> wrote:
>
> I fully support the publication of this document.
> It should have been an RFC long time back. I don’t understand why it took so
> long.
>
> Nokia has an implementation of this
Yes/support
Regards,
Jeff
> On Sep 24, 2018, at 11:21, Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
> wrote:
>
> Agreed.
>
> From: BESS on behalf of Jorge Rabadan
>
> Date: Monday, 24 September 2018 at 17:16
> To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , "bess@ietf.org"
>
> Subject: Re: [bess] Second
Agreed.
From: BESS on behalf of Jorge Rabadan
Date: Monday, 24 September 2018 at 17:16
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , "bess@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] Second WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-02
I fully support the publication of this document.
It should have been an
I fully support the publication of this document.
It should have been an RFC long time back. I don’t understand why it took so
long.
Nokia has an implementation of this draft in SROS.
Thanks.
Jorge
From: BESS on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)"
Date: Monday, September 24, 2018 at
All
Since we have received a recent IPR declaration on this draft and the first WG
last call was so long ago, we are running a second last call to reaffirm WG
consensus to publish the draft as an RFC.
Therefore, this email begins a two-week working group last call for
Jorge,
Lots of thanks for a prompt response.
As Donald has mentioned, 7432 simply left Ethernet service OAM out of scope, so
there are quite a few things tbat require specification in this area..
Regards
Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein
From: Rabadan, Jorge
Sasha,
That is an excellent point. I agree the text should say that any MEP/MIP MAC
addresses local to the PE should be advertised in EVPN.
I would even add that, since those MACs are not subject to mobility, the PE
should advertise them as “static”, i.e., with sticky bit set.
Thanks.
Jorge
Donald,
Lots of thanks again for a primpt response.
Explicitly stafing that an EVPN PE supporting customer level Ethernet service
OAM MUST adverise locally learned MAC addresses of the customer's MEPS would
address my concerns.
Regards
Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein
From: Donald Eastlake
