Re: [bess] A new draft for MVPN in IPv6-only network.

HI Fanghong, Let me pull up the points up here at the top. Dfh3> I think you were making a mistake, RT-constrain is an extra procedure and cannot run without obsoleting the propagating-along-reverse-path-of-I-PMSI procedure. So, I think the solution you considered is with too many

Re: [bess] Whether the TC/S field of the ESI label field can be used to carry a portion of Arg.FE2 according to draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-15 ?

Hi Yubao, RFC7432 assumes MPLS transport and hence label fields are 20-bit long. RFC8365 though assumes NVO transport and the label fields are 24-bit long. That’s why Ketan mentioned the label field in EVPN routes is 24-bit long. Thanks. Jorge From: BESS on behalf of wang.yub...@zte.com.cn

Re: [bess] (Authors of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis) : Query regarding Loop Protection

Hi, Not completely sure where you are coming from  Even without loop protection, suppose you have just normal mac duplication as in RFC7432. When the duplicate mac is flushed, it should be flushed from data and control plane. Removing the mac from the data path bridge-table but keeping the

[bess] FW: Call for publication of draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-18 - with multiple partial implementations (6/17 to 6/30)

BESS WG: The IDR WG requires 2 implementation to forward a document for publication. draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-18 has been partially implemented by 5 vendors, but not all features have been implemented (AFAIK). As the Shepherd for this draft, I have made a Call to the IDR WG (see

Re: [bess] (Authors of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis) : Query regarding Loop Protection

Hi Jorge, Thanks for the response. Does the flushing of M indicates a dataplane bridge-table flushing or the protocol-Rib flushing or implicitly both. The control-plane Rib may still cache it while waiting for the withdraw from remote-vtep. If it implies just the dataplane clearing, then

Re: [bess] Whether the TC/S field of the ESI label field can be used to carry a portion of Arg.FE2 according to draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-15 ?

Hi Yubao, If it is clear enough then I would avoid adding more text to confuse people :-) Thanks again for flagging this issue. Thanks, Ketan On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 2:52 PM wrote: > > Hi Ketan, > > > Thanks for your further explanations. > > Please see in line with [Yubao2]. > > > Thanks,

Re: [bess] Whether the TC/S field of the ESI label field can be used to carry a portion of Arg.FE2 according to draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-15 ?

Hi Ketan, Thanks for your further explanations. Please see in line with [Yubao2]. Thanks, Yubao 原始邮件 发件人：KetanTalaulikar 收件人：王玉保10045807; 抄送人：draft-ietf-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org;BESS; 日 期 ：2022年06月17日 15:44 主 题 ：Re: Whether the TC/S field of the ESI label field

Re: [bess] Whether the TC/S field of the ESI label field can be used to carry a portion of Arg.FE2 according to draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-15 ?

Hi Yubao, Please check inline below. On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 12:28 PM wrote: > > Hi Ketan, > > > Please see in line with [Yubao]. > > > Thanks, > > Yubao > > > > 原始邮件 > *发件人：*KetanTalaulikar > *收件人：*王玉保10045807; > *抄送人：*draft-ietf-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org;BESS; > *日 期 ：*2022年06月17日 13:33 >

Re: [bess] (Authors of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis) : Query regarding Loop Protection

Hi, It refers to the fact that the MAC is flushed from the bridge-table and therefore it is no longer duplicate. The router needs to clear the duplicate state and obviously, if the mac keeps moving, the router starts counting the moves again withing the duplication window. The key point is

Re: [bess] Whether the TC/S field of the ESI label field can be used to carry a portion of Arg.FE2 according to draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-15 ?

Hi Ketan, Please see in line with [Yubao]. Thanks, Yubao 原始邮件 发件人：KetanTalaulikar 收件人：王玉保10045807; 抄送人：draft-ietf-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org;BESS; 日 期 ：2022年06月17日 13:33 主 题 ：Re: Whether the TC/S field of the ESI label field can be used to carry a portion of