From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Feb 6 19:10:56 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD13421E8042; Wed, 6 Feb 2013 19:10:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zzwTmMXi85jE; Wed, 6 Feb 2013 19:10:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C11F21E8047; Wed, 6 Feb 2013 19:10:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-01.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.37 Message-ID: <20130207031055.16392.86427.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 19:10:55 -0800 Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 03:10:57 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Working = Group of the IETF. Title : VPLS PE Model for E-Tree Support Author(s) : Yuanlong Jiang Lucy Yong Manuel Paul Frederic Jounay Florin Balus Wim Henderickx Ali Sajassi Filename : draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-01.txt Pages : 23 Date : 2013-02-06 Abstract: A generic VPLS solution for E-Tree services is proposed which uses VLANs to indicate root/leaf traffic. A VPLS Provider Edge (PE) model is illustrated as an example for the solution. In the solution, E- Tree VPLS PEs are interconnected by PWs which carry the VLAN indicating the E-Tree attribute, the MAC address based Ethernet forwarding engine and the PW work in the same way as before. A signaling mechanism for E-Tree capability and VLAN mapping negotiation is further described. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-01 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From giles.heron@gmail.com Thu Feb 7 10:09:05 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF67621F8886 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:09:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HiA5BmDNYPFb for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:09:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from ivanoab3.miniserver.com (ivanoab3.miniserver.com [89.200.143.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F7FD21F87B6 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:09:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.17.10] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by ivanoab3.miniserver.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U3Vqt-0002JU-QE; Thu, 07 Feb 2013 18:05:39 +0000 Received: from 64-103-25-233.cisco.com ([64.103.25.233] helo=dhcp-10-55-86-89.cisco.com) by localhost.localdomain with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U3Wzf-0006S8-0s; Thu, 07 Feb 2013 19:18:47 +0000 From: Giles Heron Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: draft-boutros-l2vpn-mpls-tp-mac-wd Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 18:08:18 +0000 Message-Id: <630D5618-E4A1-4171-A164-CEC16BCA2EB3@gmail.com> To: "l2vpn@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Luca Martini , "Siva Sivabalan \(msiva\)" X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 18:09:05 -0000 Hi L2VPNers, Sami presented this draft at the last IETF: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boutros-l2vpn-mpls-tp-mac-wd-01 We mentioned at IETF that we'd really like to see more discussion of the = draft on the list. In particular we'd love to hear (on-list or = off-list) from carriers who have deployed, or who intend to deploy, VPLS = over MPLS-TP as to whether or not they see this draft as useful. Nabil & Giles From nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com Thu Feb 7 19:30:29 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9123E21E8043 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 19:30:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yTJl+aDQSJUD for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 19:30:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from fldsmtpe02.verizon.com (fldsmtpe02.verizon.com [140.108.26.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AED7721E8034 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 19:30:28 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: false Received: from unknown (HELO fldsmtpi02.verizon.com) ([166.68.71.144]) by fldsmtpe02.verizon.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2013 03:30:23 +0000 From: "Bitar, Nabil N" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,626,1355097600"; d="scan'208,217";a="409980608" Received: from fldp1lumxc7hb01.verizon.com (HELO FLDP1LUMXC7HB01.us.one.verizon.com) ([166.68.45.78]) by fldsmtpi02.verizon.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2013 03:30:22 +0000 Received: from fldp1lumxc7v63.us.one.verizon.com ([169.254.3.33]) by FLDP1LUMXC7HB01.us.one.verizon.com ([166.68.45.78]) with mapi; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:30:22 -0500 To: "l2vpn@ietf.org" Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:25:33 -0500 Subject: [l2vpn] L2VPN Agenda Slot Call for IETF 86 - Orlando Thread-Topic: [l2vpn] L2VPN Agenda Slot Call for IETF 86 - Orlando Thread-Index: Ac4FrKCj7lYmFkBwRnWu/BvYO7b1Hw== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CD39D96C76CD9nabilnbitarverizoncom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Giles Heron X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 03:30:29 -0000 --_000_CD39D96C76CD9nabilnbitarverizoncom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi L2VPN WG, Please let us know if you have a time-slot request for the L2VPN session at= IETF 86=96Orlando. Please, email us your request by Sunday February 24, 2= 013 along with the following information: 1) Draft title 2) Presenter name 3) Requested duration Please note that priority will be given to drafts that are clearly within t= he scope of the current L2VPN charter. Additional key dates to remember are: * 2013-02-18 (Monday): Internet Draft Cut-off for initial document (-00)= submission by UTC 24:00 * 2013-02-25 (Monday): Internet Draft final submission cut-off by UTC 24= :00 Thanks, Nabil and Giles --_000_CD39D96C76CD9nabilnbitarverizoncom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi L2VPN WG,

Please let us know if you have a time-slot request for the L2VPN session at= IETF 86=96Orlando. Please,  email us your request by Sunday February = 24, 2013 along with the following information:
1) Draft title
2) Presenter name
3) Requested duration

Please note that priority will be given to drafts that are clearly within t= he scope of the current L2VPN charter.

Additional key dates to remember are:
  • 2013-02-18 (Monday): Internet= Draft Cut-off for initial document (-00) submission by UTC 24:00
  • <= strong>2013-02-25 (Monday): Internet Draft final submission c= ut-off by UTC 24:00

Thanks,
Nabil and Giles
=
--_000_CD39D96C76CD9nabilnbitarverizoncom_-- From giles.heron@gmail.com Fri Feb 8 06:46:54 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD1D21F8A61 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 06:46:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BGgse6pHyyo8 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 06:46:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from ivanoab3.miniserver.com (ivanoab3.miniserver.com [89.200.143.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD19821F8A4F for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 06:46:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.17.10] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by ivanoab3.miniserver.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U3pAl-0004Rp-OL; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 14:43:27 +0000 Received: from 64-103-25-233.cisco.com ([64.103.25.233] helo=dhcp-10-55-84-9.cisco.com) by localhost.localdomain with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U3qJb-00011r-FU; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 15:56:39 +0000 From: Giles Heron Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: VLAN Aware VPLS Services Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 14:46:34 +0000 Message-Id: To: "l2vpn@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Reshad Rahman X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 14:46:54 -0000 Hi L2VPNers, at the last IETF Sami presented the following draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cai-l2vpn-vpls-vlan-aware-bundling-00 We'd like to take this opportunity to initiate some on-list discussion = on the draft. Specifically at IETF Wim called out doubts as to the need = for the draft - given that PBB VPLS can address the same problem space. = We'd like to hear whether others take the same view as Wim, or whether = consensus is that a solution that doesn't require MACinMAC overhead is = worthwhile. We'd also be interested in hearing other comments/opinions = on the draft from members of the WG. Nabil & Giles= From josh.rogers@twcable.com Fri Feb 8 07:53:40 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600C021F86B6 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 07:53:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.463 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wh6xP15OfHLR for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 07:53:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from cdpipgw01.twcable.com (cdpipgw01.twcable.com [165.237.59.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2166021F8ACA for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 07:53:38 -0800 (PST) X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.13 X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,630,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="24208413" Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB04.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.13]) by cdpipgw01.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 08 Feb 2013 10:53:06 -0500 Received: from PRVPEXVS17.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.96]) by PRVPEXHUB04.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.13]) with mapi; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:53:37 -0500 From: "Rogers, Josh" To: Giles Heron , "l2vpn@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:53:35 -0500 Subject: Re: VLAN Aware VPLS Services Thread-Topic: VLAN Aware VPLS Services Thread-Index: Ac4GFHTCkiPVVNsgQOuwuiesJUlqpw== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.5.121010 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Reshad Rahman X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 15:53:40 -0000 As an SP, I have yet to see a use case/need for this (although I see in the draft it calls out a data center application). If we had a need for this, we'd likely consider PBB-VPLS, but to date we haven't seen any need to isolate C-VLAN's (sometimes there may be a need for 2-3 S-VLAN's for isolation, but no more than that, so we would just provision 2-3 VPLS instances in that scenario) The multicast implications are interesting, but I'm still hoping E-VPN will be the long term solution for many of these scenarios. -Josh On 2/8/13 8:46 AM, "Giles Heron" wrote: >Hi L2VPNers, > >at the last IETF Sami presented the following draft: > >http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cai-l2vpn-vpls-vlan-aware-bundling-00 > >We'd like to take this opportunity to initiate some on-list discussion on >the draft. Specifically at IETF Wim called out doubts as to the need for >the draft - given that PBB VPLS can address the same problem space. We'd >like to hear whether others take the same view as Wim, or whether >consensus is that a solution that doesn't require MACinMAC overhead is >worthwhile. We'd also be interested in hearing other comments/opinions >on the draft from members of the WG. > >Nabil & Giles This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable propri= etary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyrig= ht belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the u= se of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the= intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissem= ination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents= of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawf= ul. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender imm= ediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail an= d any printout. From ostokes@extremenetworks.com Tue Feb 12 05:31:26 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4700E21F8E07 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:31:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6vtZSvlvLfZD for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:31:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from ussc-casht-p1.extremenetworks.com (ussc-casht-p1.extremenetworks.com [207.179.9.62]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C424D21F8E05 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:31:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from USEXCHANGE.corp.extremenetworks.com ([10.0.4.74]) by ussc-casht-p2.corp.extremenetworks.com ([10.255.181.88]) with mapi; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:31:25 -0800 From: Olen Stokes To: "Rogers, Josh" , Giles Heron , "l2vpn@ietf.org" Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:31:23 -0800 Subject: RE: VLAN Aware VPLS Services Thread-Topic: VLAN Aware VPLS Services Thread-Index: Ac4GFHTCkiPVVNsgQOuwuiesJUlqpwDEKdnA Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Reshad Rahman X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:31:26 -0000 I think that the draft is straightforward and worthwhile. We have had inqu= iries about this type of capability from our customers. Cheers, Olen -----Original Message----- From: l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of R= ogers, Josh Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 10:54 AM To: Giles Heron; l2vpn@ietf.org Cc: Reshad Rahman Subject: Re: VLAN Aware VPLS Services As an SP, I have yet to see a use case/need for this (although I see in the= draft it calls out a data center application). If we had a need for this,= we'd likely consider PBB-VPLS, but to date we haven't seen any need to iso= late C-VLAN's (sometimes there may be a need for 2-3 S-VLAN's for isolation= , but no more than that, so we would just provision 2-3 VPLS instances in t= hat scenario) The multicast implications are interesting, but I'm still hoping E-VPN will= be the long term solution for many of these scenarios. -Josh On 2/8/13 8:46 AM, "Giles Heron" wrote: >Hi L2VPNers, > >at the last IETF Sami presented the following draft: > >http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cai-l2vpn-vpls-vlan-aware-bundling-00 > >We'd like to take this opportunity to initiate some on-list discussion=20 >on the draft. Specifically at IETF Wim called out doubts as to the=20 >need for the draft - given that PBB VPLS can address the same problem=20 >space. We'd like to hear whether others take the same view as Wim, or=20 >whether consensus is that a solution that doesn't require MACinMAC=20 >overhead is worthwhile. We'd also be interested in hearing other=20 >comments/opinions on the draft from members of the WG. > >Nabil & Giles This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable propri= etary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyrig= ht belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the u= se of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the= intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissem= ination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents= of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawf= ul. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender imm= ediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail an= d any printout. From giles.heron@gmail.com Sat Feb 16 00:55:37 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6080D21F86BB for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 00:55:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RZzU-1oa2ihT for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 00:55:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ee0-f52.google.com (mail-ee0-f52.google.com [74.125.83.52]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B46421F86AD for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 00:55:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ee0-f52.google.com with SMTP id b15so2057321eek.25 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 00:55:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date :message-id:cc:to:mime-version:x-mailer; bh=cnhLkCNORj2oMzx5hINM8A9b5CpQ/YrCBwdP2V87UVI=; b=uFFxE3Nhs5Q8TNPx0H9ylPn12cQYFYtWOD07EDb3q+QJAgVA2g4eWLBopIOvszxLve /n5m6sB6+YoTYUCUvlqdSKPWzpHocz0zvc+0irkURZxYFcXBCy4gG/z5JRHPKkcBeMC4 VcewZdjSC5cCqAU8DZKdXBt198F2UfHfl3xmuDLGBEuQxbM8/7jQr1WW30vGndCt5RjK okYIbi/yB0QR2UAEkMPqulm10YmJ7zxwji68blryjy+fFXSw2577b1WTSg4iQLhLPgO2 IEL0GDIMR7ZJKWOqpIt6/BY/UT29/mDmISOnEmY2lTYpU6GD7ooAT0IlRVZuYTmWVG41 Y+TQ== X-Received: by 10.14.173.67 with SMTP id u43mr18526470eel.22.1361004935425; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 00:55:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from ams3-vpn-dhcp7807.cisco.com (64-103-25-233.cisco.com. [64.103.25.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l8sm53430570een.10.2013.02.16.00.55.33 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 16 Feb 2013 00:55:34 -0800 (PST) From: Giles Heron Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: comments requested - draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-01 Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 08:55:32 +0000 Message-Id: <9693247C-E7B6-4B83-8309-3EC3B3A8A645@gmail.com> To: "l2vpn@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Jiangyuanlong , Florin Balus X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 08:55:37 -0000 Hi L2VPNers, The authors of the above draft issued a new revision on February 5th. We'd like to ask the Working Group to review the draft, which can be = found here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-pe-etree-01 please provide feedback if you find any issues with the draft. Giles= From internet-drafts@ietf.org Fri Feb 22 05:32:11 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F8121F8F51; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:32:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.566 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vh2sezys8LKi; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:32:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3298821F8FCB; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:32:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk-02.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130222133211.22732.50473.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:32:11 -0800 Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 13:32:11 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Working = Group of the IETF. Title : A Framework for E-Tree Service over MPLS Network Author(s) : Simon Delord Frederic Jounay Lucy Yong Lizhong Jin Yuji Kamite Wim Henderickx Filename : draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk-02.txt Pages : 29 Date : 2013-02-22 Abstract: This document proposes a solution framework for supporting Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) Ethernet Tree (E-Tree) services over a Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) network. The objective is to provide a simple and effective approach to emulate E-Tree services in addition to Ethernet LAN (E-LAN) services on an existing MPLS network. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk-02 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From internet-drafts@ietf.org Fri Feb 22 05:47:29 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DE5A21F8F23; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:47:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.567 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.567 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.031, BAYES_00=-2.599, FUZZY_VLIUM=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QDUnFrDiC0kk; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:47:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17B8F21F8E2D; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:47:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-ldp-vpls-broadcast-exten-05.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130222134729.15877.9863.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:47:29 -0800 Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 13:47:29 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Working = Group of the IETF. Title : Extension to LDP-VPLS for Ethernet Broadcast and Multica= st Author(s) : Frederic Jounay Yuji Kamite Zhihua Liu Manuel Paul Ruediger Kunze Mach(Guoyi) Chen Lizhong Jin Filename : draft-ietf-l2vpn-ldp-vpls-broadcast-exten-05.txt Pages : 20 Date : 2013-02-22 Abstract: This document proposes a simple extension to LDP-VPLS to improve bandwidth efficiency for Ethernet broadcast/multicast traffic within a carrier's network. It makes use of unidirectional point-to-multipoint PseudoWires to minimise payload frame duplication on physical links. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2vpn-ldp-vpls-broadcast-exten There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-ldp-vpls-broadcast-exten-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-l2vpn-ldp-vpls-broadcast-exte= n-05 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From internet-drafts@ietf.org Sun Feb 24 20:21:42 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDC9121F90C5; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:21:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.474 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.125, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F+lUMuIconyM; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:21:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0E6C21F9131; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:21:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req-02.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130225042141.441.24281.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:21:41 -0800 Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 04:21:43 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Working = Group of the IETF. Title : Requirements for Ethernet VPN (E-VPN) Author(s) : Ali Sajassi Rahul Aggarwal Nabil Bitar Aldrin Isaac Filename : draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req-02.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2013-02-24 Abstract: The widespread adoption of Ethernet L2VPN services and the advent of new applications for the technology (e.g., data center interconnect) have culminated in a new set of requirements that are not readily addressable by the current VPLS solution. In particular, multi-homing with all-active forwarding is not supported and there's no existing solution to leverage MP2MP LSPs for optimizing the delivery of multi- destination frames. Furthermore, the provisioning of VPLS, even in the context of BGP-based auto-discovery, requires network operators to specify various network parameters on top of the access configuration. This document specifies the requirements for an Ethernet VPN (E-VPN) solution which addresses the above issues. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req-02 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From sajassi@cisco.com Sun Feb 24 22:10:29 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4D6421F9161 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:10:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AfYJk8kv-kyR for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:10:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9560621F913F for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:10:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7635; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1361772628; x=1362982228; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=twyvVX1crjZqMwHG1h3t04QJ1uHzLjQJ1BSvP1+T2/o=; b=cw6EtDUVaXUPJS4NXDgjZxvNZitElFKylZvzOHaTOObZ20vlLA0QZgwC gB99u+RAjyZwqzzFksJbM0a+bsN8hlU+K1mDmQ5XtnuSXiFuXs9vyUPax 85qJkpUGFFrN0/m+P4mcJcqmK7cv3SuXkRXEkQqLrjb2GCUr4oaQfud4E 8=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgMFAPn/KlGtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABFgkMjvmyBDRZzgh8BAQEEDg9ICQsSAQgRAwECAQodORQJCgQOBQiHeQMPAQuzWg2JRo0yC4EgIAYLDQOCVmEDl1qPSIMHgXI1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,732,1355097600"; d="scan'208,217";a="180705420" Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 Feb 2013 06:10:28 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com [173.37.183.84]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r1P6ARc6012306 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 06:10:27 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x13.cisco.com ([fe80::5404:b599:9f57:834b]) by xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([173.37.183.84]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:10:27 -0600 From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" To: "Giles Heron (giheron)" , "Bitar, Nabil N" Subject: Re: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req Thread-Topic: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req Thread-Index: AQHOEx7Nxah4cI974UWEbY/qBVEinA== Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 06:10:26 +0000 Message-ID: <69670F7146898C4583F56DA9AD32F77B12309229@xmb-aln-x13.cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.1.120420 x-originating-ip: [10.21.66.135] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_69670F7146898C4583F56DA9AD32F77B12309229xmbalnx13ciscoc_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "l2vpn@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 06:10:29 -0000 --_000_69670F7146898C4583F56DA9AD32F77B12309229xmbalnx13ciscoc_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Giles, Nabil: Today, I went over all the WG LC comments one more time to ensure that all = the comments posted to the WG mailing list have been resolved. I have publi= shed rev02 with all the comment resolutions. Cheers, Ali ________________________________ * To: Giles Heron >, Lucy yong = > * Subject: Re: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req * From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" > * Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:09:53 +0000 Giles, Nabil: I think all the comments regarding this last call have been resolved. I have already incorporated them into the next rev. of the draft. Regards, Ali On 11/4/12 1:02 PM, "Giles Heron" wrote: >Thanks Lucy, > >authors - I'd like to see you address Yuanlong and Lucy's comments. >Perhaps you can discuss face-to-face this week? > >Once the comments have been addressed we can progress the draft further. > >thanks. > >Giles > >On 4 Nov 2012, at 19:40, Lucy yong wrote: > >> I support this draft but have some comments. >> >> 1) in section 4.3, Text: The latter scenario often means that requiring >>a dedicated >> link between the PEs, for the operation of the multi-homing >>mechanism, is not appealing from cost standpoint. >> >> Comment: a dedicated link between PEs. will this link is in IGP link >>too? or private link. >> May PE nodes that are multi-homed to a same CE be different ASes? If >>yes, state it out. >> >> 2) in section 4.6, the last paragraph should state a requirement for >>flow based load balance. >> >> 3) It should add one requirement in supporting Ethernet L2VPN across >>multi-ASes >> >> 4) As the draft mentioned, the new service interfaces are required for >>DC interconnection. If DC uses NVo3 in future, will these service >>interfaces are still necessary? Suggest giving some use cases where the >>new service interfaces are necessary in an appendix. >> >> Cheers, >> Lucy >> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 23:34:53 +0100 >>> From: Giles Heron >>> To: "l2vpn at ietf.org" >>> Subject: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req >>> Message-ID: <755C3ABB-ADE3-42EE-8BE1-FBBEDB84BC32 at gmail.com> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii >>> >>> This email initiates an L2VPN WG Last Call for: >>> >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req-01 >>> >>> please comment to the list as to the suitability of this draft for >>> publication as a Standards Track RFC from the L2VPN WG. >>> >>> this last call will close on Friday 2nd November. >>> >>> Nabil & Giles >> > --_000_69670F7146898C4583F56DA9AD32F77B12309229xmbalnx13ciscoc_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <626EEAC70E8625448BBBB8E049AE01F1@cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Giles, Nabil:

Today, I went over all the WG LC comments one more time to ensure that= all the comments posted to the WG mailing list have been resolved. I have = published rev02 with all the comment resolutions.

Cheers,
Ali 


http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req=
-01
>>>=20
>>> please comment to the list as to the suitability of this draft=
 for
>>> publication as a Standards Track RFC from the L2VPN WG.
>>>=20
>>> this last call will close on Friday 2nd November.
>>>=20
>>> Nabil & Giles
>>=20
>
--_000_69670F7146898C4583F56DA9AD32F77B12309229xmbalnx13ciscoc_-- From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 10:51:46 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 425FF21E8039; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:51:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.529 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.529 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K+oZBrHH+kck; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:51:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 470C321E8053; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:51:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-mac-opt-08.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130225185144.24810.61681.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:51:44 -0800 Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 18:51:46 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Working = Group of the IETF. Title : LDP Extensions for Optimized MAC Address Withdrawal in H= -VPLS Author(s) : Pranjal Kumar Dutta Florin Balus Olen Stokes Geraldine Calvinac Filename : draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-mac-opt-08.txt Pages : 22 Date : 2013-02-25 Abstract: [RFC4762] describes a mechanism to remove or unlearn MAC addresses that have been dynamically learned in a VPLS Instance for faster convergence on topology change. The procedure also removes MAC addresses in the VPLS that do not require relearning due to such topology change. This document defines an enhancement to the MAC Address Withdrawal procedure with empty MAC List [RFC4762], which enables a Provider Edge(PE) device to remove only the MAC addresses that need to be relearned. Additional extensions to [RFC4762] MAC Withdrawal procedures are specified to provide optimized MAC flushing for the PBB-VPLS specified in [I-D.ietf-l2vpn-pbb-vpls-pe-model] . The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-mac-opt There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-mac-opt-08 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-mac-opt-08 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 15:08:14 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16C3E21F8E69; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:08:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VkSfikesCpd1; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:08:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43D8B21F943E; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:08:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-multihoming-05.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130225230804.17139.63644.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:08:04 -0800 Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:08:14 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Working = Group of the IETF. Title : BGP based Multi-homing in Virtual Private LAN Service Author(s) : Bhupesh Kothari Kireeti Kompella Wim Henderickx Florin Balus James Uttaro Senad Palislamovic Wen Lin Filename : draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-multihoming-05.txt Pages : 27 Date : 2013-02-25 Abstract: Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) is a Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (VPN) that gives its customers the appearance that their sites are connected via a Local Area Network (LAN). It is often required for the Service Provider (SP) to give the customer redundant connectivity to some sites, often called "multi-homing". This memo shows how BGP-based multi-homing can be offered in the context of LDP and BGP VPLS solutions. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-multihoming There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-multihoming-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-multihoming-05 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 15:14:45 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C745021F94FF; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:14:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KeiOugdY6Uaa; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:14:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B705521F9500; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:14:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-evpn-04.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130225231444.8554.74067.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:14:44 -0800 Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:14:46 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Working = Group of the IETF. Title : PBB-EVPN Author(s) : Ali Sajassi Samer Salam Sami Boutros Nabil Bitar Aldrin Isaac Lizhong Jin Filename : draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-evpn-04.txt Pages : 20 Date : 2013-02-25 Abstract: This document discusses how Ethernet Provider Backbone Bridging [802.1ah] can be combined with E-VPN in order to reduce the number of BGP MAC advertisement routes by aggregating Customer/Client MAC (C- MAC) addresses via Provider Backbone MAC address (B-MAC), provide client MAC address mobility using C-MAC aggregation and B-MAC sub- netting, confine the scope of C-MAC learning to only active flows, offer per site policies and avoid C-MAC address flushing on topology changes. The combined solution is referred to as PBB-EVPN. Conventions The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-evpn There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-evpn-04 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-evpn-04 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 15:37:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB96621E8120; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:37:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.536 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.536 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.063, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vvRnEpydjKFl; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:37:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4D121E8152; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:37:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-03.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130225233743.16186.50563.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:37:43 -0800 Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:37:44 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Working = Group of the IETF. Title : BGP MPLS Based Ethernet VPN Author(s) : Ali Sajassi Rahul Aggarwal Wim Henderickx Florin Balus Aldrin Isaac James Uttaro Filename : draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-03.txt Pages : 47 Date : 2013-02-25 Abstract: This document describes procedures for BGP MPLS based Ethernet VPNs (E-VPN). The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-03 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-03 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From susan.hares@huawei.com Tue Feb 26 15:51:27 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E6A21F87A3; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:51:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZGTNiLZ9Zo8o; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:51:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B46D21F871D; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:51:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AQC10503; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:51:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:50:23 +0000 Received: from DFWEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.203) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:51:18 +0000 Received: from DFWEML509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.11.139]) by dfweml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.203]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:51:11 -0800 From: Susan Hares To: "internet-drafts@ietf.org" , "i-d-announce@ietf.org" Subject: RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk-02.txt Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk-02.txt Thread-Index: AQHOEQEXOo27mYvp90moMlWQeYh8xJiM1oYw Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:51:10 +0000 Message-ID: <728F9B956B2C48439CA9294B1723B146237F19E1@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <20130222133211.22732.50473.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130222133211.22732.50473.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.212.246.165] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "l2vpn@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:51:27 -0000 THVjeTogDQoNCkNvbmdyYXR1bGF0aW9ucyBvbiBnZXR0aW5nIHRoaXMgZnJhbWV3b3JrIG91dCBh dCBsYXN0IQ0KDQpZb3VyIGhhcmQgd29yayBwYWlkIG9mZi4gDQoNClN1ZSANCg0KLS0tLS1Pcmln aW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IGwydnBuLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgW21haWx0bzps MnZwbi1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnRzQGlldGYu b3JnDQpTZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDIyLCAyMDEzIDU6MzIgQU0NClRvOiBpLWQtYW5u b3VuY2VAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCkNjOiBsMnZwbkBpZXRmLm9yZw0KU3ViamVjdDogSS1EIEFjdGlvbjog ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1sMnZwbi1ldHJlZS1mcndrLTAyLnR4dA0KDQoNCkEgTmV3IEludGVybmV0LURy YWZ0IGlzIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBmcm9tIHRoZSBvbi1saW5lIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBkaXJlY3Rv cmllcy4NCiBUaGlzIGRyYWZ0IGlzIGEgd29yayBpdGVtIG9mIHRoZSBMYXllciAyIFZpcnR1YWwg UHJpdmF0ZSBOZXR3b3JrcyBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIG9mIHRoZSBJRVRGLg0KDQoJVGl0bGUgICAg ICAgICAgIDogQSBGcmFtZXdvcmsgZm9yIEUtVHJlZSBTZXJ2aWNlIG92ZXIgTVBMUyBOZXR3b3Jr DQoJQXV0aG9yKHMpICAgICAgIDogU2ltb24gRGVsb3JkDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgIEZyZWRlcmljIEpvdW5heQ0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBMdWN5IFlvbmcN CiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgTGl6aG9uZyBKaW4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgWXVqaSBLYW1pdGUNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgV2ltIEhlbmRl cmlja3gNCglGaWxlbmFtZSAgICAgICAgOiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWwydnBuLWV0cmVlLWZyd2stMDIu dHh0DQoJUGFnZXMgICAgICAgICAgIDogMjkNCglEYXRlICAgICAgICAgICAgOiAyMDEzLTAyLTIy DQoNCkFic3RyYWN0Og0KICAgVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBwcm9wb3NlcyBhIHNvbHV0aW9uIGZyYW1l d29yayBmb3Igc3VwcG9ydGluZyBNZXRybw0KICAgRXRoZXJuZXQgRm9ydW0gKE1FRikgRXRoZXJu ZXQgVHJlZSAoRS1UcmVlKSBzZXJ2aWNlcyBvdmVyIGENCiAgIE11bHRpcHJvdG9jb2wgTGFiZWwg U3dpdGNoaW5nIChNUExTKSBuZXR3b3JrLiBUaGUgb2JqZWN0aXZlIGlzIHRvDQogICBwcm92aWRl IGEgc2ltcGxlIGFuZCBlZmZlY3RpdmUgYXBwcm9hY2ggdG8gZW11bGF0ZSBFLVRyZWUgc2Vydmlj ZXMNCiAgIGluIGFkZGl0aW9uIHRvIEV0aGVybmV0IExBTiAoRS1MQU4pIHNlcnZpY2VzIG9uIGFu IGV4aXN0aW5nIE1QTFMNCiAgIG5ldHdvcmsuDQoNCg0KVGhlIElFVEYgZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIgc3Rh dHVzIHBhZ2UgZm9yIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgaXM6DQpodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3Jn L2RvYy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWwydnBuLWV0cmVlLWZyd2sNCg0KVGhlcmUncyBhbHNvIGEgaHRtbGl6 ZWQgdmVyc2lvbiBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQ6DQpodHRwOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaHRtbC9kcmFm dC1pZXRmLWwydnBuLWV0cmVlLWZyd2stMDINCg0KQSBkaWZmIGZyb20gdGhlIHByZXZpb3VzIHZl cnNpb24gaXMgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0Og0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9yZmNkaWZmP3VybDI9 ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1sMnZwbi1ldHJlZS1mcndrLTAyDQoNCg0KSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzIGFyZSBh bHNvIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBieSBhbm9ueW1vdXMgRlRQIGF0Og0KZnRwOi8vZnRwLmlldGYub3JnL2lu dGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0cy8NCg0K From giles.heron@gmail.com Wed Feb 27 09:54:22 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742D721F8862 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:54:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.266 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.266 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Iap19zhctsjb for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:54:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ee0-f44.google.com (mail-ee0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0913821F8858 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:54:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ee0-f44.google.com with SMTP id l10so740106eei.17 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:54:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date :message-id:cc:to:mime-version:x-mailer; bh=RMwGkt4369AeqGbmNDEjEYQPIE0Sn3KCtCPpoMsu1iw=; b=nvIbWwvV4j053zu2i+CxmCbC+8nGm1P/yIZK3FkzXGdWPSM0Jy8TVHwZjIJ2r0t8G1 QYBBamZLk/Rb8aUOeWC4/fUSH60FRMwN6nDr266ovBYrH8J7dJsNWpNC+x+VT3ziygdf jx9z7/TCn4SpW7paay3ozdLdULcynp9h6BBtkZwe6s94YqtT9TrEdzydVtsTLp79IfIj yGz48OJzTIvlBiXqrLOqS8AE3NiRpZhFPn8tjoLO8LWFqps9eUKIWpiDani+HRluHptI 4EDjCUQsyG3PqeJk4v0ULrUu08NYN6K0MRXClgFG2rGA+XNsCv8vDCNUfer48PjlFssl crBA== X-Received: by 10.14.207.200 with SMTP id n48mr8398141eeo.4.1361987653161; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:54:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-10-55-80-59.cisco.com (64-103-25-233.cisco.com. [64.103.25.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q5sm7635143eeo.17.2013.02.27.09.54.11 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:54:12 -0800 (PST) From: Giles Heron Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: draft agenda for L2VPN @ IETF86 published Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:53:52 +0000 Message-Id: <6A22EFAA-7996-4E85-BFFF-06025675DCD7@gmail.com> To: "l2vpn@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:54:22 -0000 Hi everyone, the draft agenda has now been published: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/agenda/agenda-86-l2vpn Speakers please check your details are correct. Anyone who wanted to = speak but isn't on the list please contact the chairs ASAP. Nabil & Giles= From linda.dunbar@huawei.com Thu Feb 28 13:28:21 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3CD421F8922 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:28:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.622 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.622 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.024, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sDAKryoIILpg for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:28:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1967B21F8840 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:28:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AQD83075; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 21:28:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 21:27:15 +0000 Received: from DFWEML407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.132) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 21:28:15 +0000 Received: from DFWEML509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.11.139]) by dfweml407-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.132]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:28:08 -0800 From: Linda Dunbar To: Lucy yong , Susan Hares Subject: RE: comment on draft-sajassi-l2vpn-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-01 Thread-Topic: comment on draft-sajassi-l2vpn-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-01 Thread-Index: Ac4V7IyD4mMZ6DH7Q1GTbDhPRXkI2AACv0SAAAAcW7A= Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 21:28:07 +0000 Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645AE56FD@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D4523355B@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D4523355B@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.130.196] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645AE56FDdfweml509mbxchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "l2vpn@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 21:28:21 -0000 --_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645AE56FDdfweml509mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ali, et al, I want to add a few more comments to the draft in addition to Lucy's points= : When you say "connecting E-VPN NVEs within a DC" in Section 2.1, do you me= an allowing a NVE to route data frames among directly attached VMs that bel= ong to different E-VPN instances? In Section 3 "Default Gateway Addressing", you stated that "NVE behaves as = an IP Gateway from the perspective of the attached end stations". However, the default gateway specified in end stations usually won't be an= y NVE. Therefore letting NVEs to route traffic among different E-VPN instan= ces may violate the intention of traffic separation that L2VPN aims to prov= ide. Even though you only allow NVEs to route traffic among IP subnets belonging= to one customers, those NVEs basically merge multiple virtual network inst= ances to one, which might not be the desired behavior by the customer. Linda From: Lucy yong Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 1:48 PM To: 'draft-sajassi-l2vpn-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding@tools.ietf.org' Subject: comment on draft-sajassi-l2vpn-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-01 Hello Ali and All, I have read this draft and have some comments. As you may know or not, I ha= ve been thinking and working on this topics since writing nvo3 use case dra= ft (draft-ietf-nvo3-use-case) and nvo3 framework and data plane addition (d= raft-yong-nvo3-frwk-dpreq); glad to see you have drafted the solution docum= ent now and wish to work with you all on this draft as a co-author. Here are some major comments: * Case 2 is about interconnecting DC infrastructure via WAN, where D= C operator can build one IP VPN that contain multiple IP subnets. I think t= his is the carrier's carrier case in section 9 in rfc4364, not inter-as cas= e specified in current document. In addition, there are two options for thi= s case, one is used of routing aggregation, anther one is without routing a= ggregation. Both let PE not maintain host/vm specific addresses in forwardi= ng path and DC operator to build an IP VPN over WAN without WAN SP awarenes= s. * Case3 may also implemented in following way, which should be docum= ented too. NVE1 GW1 GW2 NVE2 +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | ... ... | | ... ... | | ... | | ... ... | |(EVI)-(VRF) | |(EVI)-(VRF) | | [LS ] | |(VRF)-(EVI) | | .|.| | | .|. .|. | | |...| | | ... |..| | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ ^ v ^ V ^ V ^ V | | | | | | | | VM1->-+ +------>------+ +----------+ +---------------+ +->-VM2 Figure 4b: Inter-Subnet Forwarding Among E-VPN NVEs in Different DCs with Route Aggregation * Case 4 may also implemented in following way, which should be docu= mented too. NVE1 GW1 ASBR NVE2 +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | ... ... | | ... ... | | ... | | ... | |(EVI)-(VRF) | |(EVI)-(VRF) | | [LS ] | | (VRF)| | .|.|. | | |. .| | | |...| | | |..| | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ ^ v ^ V ^ V ^ V | | | | | | | | VM1->-+ +------>-----+ +----------+ +---------------+ +->-H1 Figure 5b: Inter-Subnet Forwarding Among IP-VPN Sites and E-VPN NVEs with Route Aggregation * Document assume that host/vm send inter subnet packet to the MAC a= ddress of IRB. But does not mention how that may happen, i.e. via configura= tion the gateway MAC address on host/vm or via the protocol such as ARP or = DHCP. IMO: it need to describe it. * It is not clear to me if the VNID is per EVPN instances or per IP = VPN? If it is former, each subnet, i.e. EVPN instance has its own VNID, NVE= may also need to convert the VNID for inter subnet forwarding. * The term "EVPN site" is used in this document, the site has been u= sed in VPN technology a lot and has some notion to link the physical locati= on. But I don't know that this document has that notion, it is virtual site= , i.e. EVPN site may spread among many servers. Is that right? Like to hear from you on these. Regards/Thanks, Lucy --_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645AE56FDdfweml509mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Ali, et al,

 

I want to add a few mo= re comments to the draft in addition to Lucy’s points:

 

When you say “connecting E-VPN NVEs within a DC” in Secti= on 2.1,  do you mean allowing a NVE to route data frames among directl= y attached VMs that belong to different  E-VPN instances?

 

In Section 3 “Default Gateway Addressing”, you stated tha= t “NVE behaves as an IP Gateway from the perspective of the attached = end stations”.

 

However, the  default gateway specified in end stations usually = won’t be any NVE. Therefore letting NVEs to route traffic among diffe= rent E-VPN instances may violate the intention of traffic separation that L2VPN aims to provide.

 

Even though you only allow NVEs to route traffic among IP subnets bel= onging to one customers, those NVEs basically merge multiple virtual networ= k instances to one, which might not be the desired behavior by the customer.

 

Linda

 

 

 

From: Lucy yon= g
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 1:48 PM
To: 'draft-sajassi-l2vpn-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding@tools.ietf.org= '
Subject: comment on draft-sajassi-l2vpn-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding= -01

 

Hello Ali and All,

 

I have read this draft and have some comments. As yo= u may know or not, I have been thinking and working on this topics since wr= iting nvo3 use case draft (draft-ietf-nvo3-use-case) and nvo3 framework and= data plane addition (draft-yong-nvo3-frwk-dpreq); glad to see you have drafted the solution document now and wish to work wi= th you all on this draft as a co-author.

 

Here are some major comments:

 

·        Case 2 is about interconnecting DC infrastru= cture via WAN, where DC operator can build one IP VPN that contain multiple= IP subnets. I think this is the carrier’s carrier case in section 9 = in rfc4364, not inter-as case specified in current document. In addition, there are two options for this case, one= is used of routing aggregation, anther one is without routing aggregation.= Both let PE not maintain host/vm specific addresses in forwarding path and= DC operator to build an IP VPN over WAN without WAN SP awareness.

·        Case3 may also implemented in following way,= which should be documented too.

 

       &nb= sp;    NVE1        &= nbsp;   GW1         =     GW2         = ;   NVE2

      +---------= ---+  +------------+  +------------+  &#= 43;------------+

      | ... &nb= sp; ...  |  | ...   ...  |  |  &nbs= p; ...     |  | ...   ...  |

      |(EVI)-(V= RF) |  |(EVI)-(VRF) |  |   [LS ]    |&nb= sp; |(VRF)-(EVI) |

      | .|.|&nb= sp;      |  | .|.   .|.  |&nbs= p; |   |...|    |  | ...   |..| |

      +---------= ---+  +------------+  +------------+  &#= 43;------------+

       &nb= sp; ^ v           &n= bsp; ^     V       &= nbsp;  ^   V        =        ^  V

       &nb= sp; | |           &n= bsp; |     |       &= nbsp;  |   |        =        |  |

=    VM1->-+ +------>------+   &nb= sp; +----------+   +---------------+  +-= >-VM2

=  

  Figure 4b: Inter-Subnet Forwarding Amo= ng E-VPN NVEs in Different DCs

=    with Route Aggregation

=  

·        Case 4 may also implemented in following way= , which should be documented too.

 

       &nb= sp;    NVE1        &= nbsp;   GW1         =     ASBR        &nbs= p;  NVE2

      +---------= ---+  +------------+  +------------+  &#= 43;------------+

      | ... &nb= sp; ...  |  | ...   ...  |  |  &nbs= p; ...     |  |      = ;  ... |

      |(EVI)-(V= RF) |  |(EVI)-(VRF) |  |   [LS ]    |&nb= sp; |       (VRF)|

      | .|.|.&n= bsp;     |  | |.    .|   = |  |   |...|    |  |   &n= bsp;   |..| |

      +---------= ---+  +------------+  +------------+  &#= 43;------------+

       &nb= sp; ^ v            ^=       V       &= nbsp;  ^   V        =        ^  V

       &nb= sp; | |            |=       |       &= nbsp;  |   |        =        |  |

   VM1->-+ +------>--= ---+      +----------+   = 3;---------------+  +->-H1

  Figure 5b: Inter-Subnet Forwarding Amo= ng IP-VPN Sites and E-VPN NVEs

=    with Route Aggregation

=  

·        Document assume that host/vm send inter subn= et packet to the MAC address of IRB. But does not mention how that may happ= en, i.e. via configuration the gateway MAC address on host/vm or via the pr= otocol such as ARP or DHCP.  IMO: it need to describe it.

·        It is not clear to me if the VNID is per EVP= N instances or per IP VPN? If it is former, each subnet, i.e. EVPN instance= has its own VNID, NVE may also need to convert the VNID for inter subnet f= orwarding.

·        The term “EVPN site” is used in = this document, the site has been used in VPN technology a lot and has some = notion to link the physical location. But I don’t know that this docu= ment has that notion, it is virtual site, i.e. EVPN site may spread among many servers. Is that right?

 

Like to hear from you on these.

 

Regards/Thanks,

Lucy

--_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645AE56FDdfweml509mbxchi_--