Hi Vinayak,
In the document the reply sub-function section says that the PE SHOULD reply to
DAD NS messages, but it is not a MUST. So if your implementation has a config
knob to not reply DAD NS messages as an exception, it could still be compliant
with the document.
Thanks.
Jorge
From:
Stephane Litkowski has requested publication of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df-08
as Proposed Standard on behalf of the BESS working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df/
___
BESS
Stephane Litkowski has requested publication of
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment-07 as Proposed Standard on behalf of
the BESS working group.
Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-virtual-eth-segment/
Hi Jorge,
Thank you for a detailed response.
As you said this is a corner case - hence may be it can be left to
implementation. That is, a PE can have a config knob to treat DAD NS as an
exception and not respond to it.
Regards,
Vinayak
From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
Hi Vinayak,
Others can comment too, but these are my comments:
* One of the main benefits of proxy-arp/nd is the reduction of flooding,
and DAD is multicast traffic and it may be significant in an EVPN BD. So
proxy-ND replying to DAD NS messages is still important IMO.
* Although I
Hi Jorge,
A question related to DAD performed by CEs in the context of Proxy-ND.
1) Say is IP1 allocation to MAC1 on a CE is released by the CE 1 (DHCP
release) and IP1 is assigned to MAC2 (CE2) by DHCP server immediately (common
in DCs).
2) Now CE2 tries to perform DAD before
