Hello,
I would like to update the IANA registries some of our drafts use and request
IANA to perform early allocations for EVPN Layer 2 Attributes Control Flags
https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-extended-communities/bgp-extended-communities.xhtml#evpn-layer-2-attributes-control-flags
Sub-type Name Reference
---- ---------------- -------------
P Advertising PE is the primary PE RFC8214
B Advertising PE is the backup PE RFC8214
C Control word [RFC4448] MUST be present RFC8214
* Left undefined.
M (2) Mode of operation (VLAN signaling)
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc
V (2) VID normalisation
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc
Draft-evpn-vpws-fxc will be updated soon to include an actual request to IANA
in its section 8 (IANA considerations, currently empty ;-)
I would like to propose Bit 4 be left undefined for two reasons:
nibble-alignment of M,V and as a possible spot for Flow-Label signaling
(RFC7432-bis) which is better suited right next to C-bit.
Nota:
I will also be submitting an errata against RFC8214. While technically section
8 is not requesting any bit-position, the ordering of requests P-B-C vs.. the
field definition B-P-C is confusing or at least, inconsistent. Accepted or not,
I just want to highlight in an errata so that there is a clarifying statement
that the field definition shall prime (over IANA ‘order’...?)
3.1<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8214#section-3.1>. EVPN Layer 2 Attributes
Extended Community
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MBZ |C|P|B| (MBZ = MUST Be Zero)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Name Meaning
---------------------------------------------------------------
P If set to 1 in multihoming Single-Active scenarios, ...
B If set to 1 in multihoming Single-Active scenarios, ...
C If set to 1, a control word
[RFC4448<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4448>] MUST be present ...
8<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8214#section-8>. IANA Considerations
Initial registrations are as follows:
P Advertising PE is the primary PE.
B Advertising PE is the backup PE.
C Control word [RFC4448<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4448>] MUST
be present.
Regards,
Luc André
Luc André Burdet | Cisco | [email protected] | Tel: +1 613 254 4814
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
