Hi, > [Lucy] In your DC, do VM or physical server support Pedro's solution? if > not, how do you run rfc4364 in your DC?
I am not sure what you are specifically referring to as "Pedro's solution" L3vpn for end systems is useful in decoupling control and data plane - so if you are asking for that - the answer is yes. However there are many ways to accomplish the same decoupling or even I am aware about work of some vendor to run BGP native to the hosts. I think to organize the discussion we should be very specific and talk SAFI here. SAFI 128 is useful to interconnect IP subnets. SAFI 70 may be useful to interconnect L2 segments. > [Lucy] I do not say that E-IP-VPN for everything. we have EVPN and IP > VPN. As the name suggestes "E-IP-VPN" does integrate both EVPN and IPVPN. What else it does not cover ? Token Ring or FDDI L2 ? If you observe this thread carefully which apparently even Yakov have missed the claim Kireeti has made is very clear what purpose E-IP-VPN is to serve. Quote: "b) In the quite common case where all traffic from a TS is IP, you don't have to maintain two tables and two forwarding paradigms at the NVE (one for IPs and one for MACs). This is common enough to warrant optimization." > [Lucy] where was the original idea? you mean to let operator deal with > rfc4364 and evpn for their applications? Why not ? Cheers, R. _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
