Robert, > Hi Yakov, > > > The claim you made in the last paragraph above is factually incorrect > > - in the context of DC, EVPN can address *not* "only packets bridged > > in the same VLAN", but *also* can be used to provide (optimal) routing > > among VMs in *different* VLANs (different IP subnets). For more details > > Allow me to observe that the goal of DC design is not only to to > provide optimal routing within the DC various VLANs (different IP > subnets) and treat DCs are isolated islands. > > For a fact I am currently working on integration of DC tenant VPNs > with *existing* deployed L3VPNs in the WAN network. > > In this respect yr claim that EVPN solves the problem is factually > incorrect too as it requires to build EVPN (SAFI 70) to RFC4364 (SAFI > 128) gateways or to transition my WAN to be now EVPN based. Both > options as you can imagine are not that operationally attractive.
Perhaps if you would bother to read my e-mail carefully you would be able to notice that my claim was about the ability of E-VPN to provide (optimal) routing among VMs in *different* VLANs - I made no claims about interworking between VMs in DC and 2547 VPN sites. So, you are yet to show that my claim "is factually incorrect". Yakov. _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
