Any one from the rfc7432 authors, members, and/or chairs, if they can help on below. A response will surely help establish logic behind behavior observed across vendors.
Regards, Saumya. From: Dikshit, Saumya <saumya.dikshit=40hpe....@dmarc.ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2024 5:52 PM To: bess@ietf.org; bess-cha...@ietf.org Cc: Devarajan, Venkatavaradhan <venkatavaradhan.devara...@hpe.com> Subject: [bess] Query related to rfc7432, multihoming : https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7432#section-14.1.2 Hello All, I have question in context of multiple path reachability to a MAC route published with an ESI in an RT-2. Are both "Ethernet A-D per EVI route" and "Ethernet A-D per ES route" mandated to determine/establish reachability via more than one paths to the advertised MAC ? Or Just "Ethernet A-D per ES route" should suffice to determine the same ? The RFC seems to mandate both for determining more than one path.s The related excerpts from the rfc7432 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7432#section-14.1.2<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7432*section-14.1.2__;Iw!!NpxR!mMMrO31ZsVA-Ltu3w56iNZRxb9pX92bqk6XiOshUPcitwhZ9LCeGgJKn5bJYYfVpUraEGr-gSaoZ3fx9K1eHungZa5WIuQrEUg$> "A remote PE that receives a MAC/IP Advertisement route with a non-reserved ESI SHOULD consider the advertised MAC address to be reachable via all PEs that have advertised reachability to that MAC address's EVI/ES via the combination of an Ethernet A-D per EVI route for that EVI/ES (and Ethernet tag, if applicable) AND an Ethernet A-D per ES route for that ES." Regards, Saumya.
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list -- bess@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to bess-le...@ietf.org
