[bess] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis-10.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis-10.txt is now available. It is a work item of the BGP Enabled ServiceS (BESS) WG of the IETF. Title: BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN Authors: Ali Sajassi Luc Andre Burdet John Drake Jorge Rabadan Name:draft-ie

[bess] draft-ietf-bess-mutlicast-controller-13

Jeffrey Zhang We need to discuss the following sections and topics: * Section 3.1.1 - Encapsulation Tunnel - needs error handling in text, clear definition of AFI/SAFI + SubTLVs supported These statements apply to all of the new tunnels definitions: * Define which AFI/SAFIs the t

[bess] My comments regarding the EVPN Underlay Network Migration From IPv4 to IPv6 draft presentation

Ali and all, My comment at the BESS WG session during the presentation of the EVPN Underlay Network Migration From IPv4 to IPv6 was about usage of Assisted Ingress Replication

[bess] BESS drafts and IDR chairs

Drafts under IDR chair review: 1. draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-10 (Reviewers: Jeff Haas, Susan Hares) IDR discussion (Jeff's latest email) https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/jEU8rZEKMsG4uANupzLY2-WKtis/ Full discussion: https://wiki.ietf.org/group/idr/Feedback-to-BESS/ev

[bess] IDR's wiki link to

Just in case you want find IDR chairs comments on Bess drafts, click on the link below. https://wiki.ietf.org/e/en/group/idr/Feedback-to-BESS Let me know if the wiki link is helpful. Sue ___ BESS mailing list -- bess@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an e

[bess] Do we need yet another link bandwidth community?

Hello All, Checking on the need for draft-li-idr-link-bandwidth-ex when we already have the EVPN Link Bandwidth Extended Community (draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb). Is it because of the name containing "EVPN" or am I missing something? If it is just the name, I hope we still have the time to cha

[bess] Adoption of the EVPN Fast Reroute draft

Hi all, The EVPN Fast reroute draft has been mentioned as being in the middle of the queue for the BESS WG adoption call at the BESS WG session today. IMHO and FWIW this draft is: * Short, well-written and easy t

[bess] Re: [Idr] Do we need yet another link bandwidth community?

Hi Ketan, I agree we don’t need yet another new draft to carry LBW community. As we know the base draft(draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth) is being revived to support both transitive and non-transitive use cases. This was presented in Mondays IDR session: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePPCAPOSQf

[bess] Re: [Idr] Do we need yet another link bandwidth community?

Hi Reshma, Glad to see that we are in agreement to avoid another LBW extcomm. One of the points that I was trying to make is that we don't have a "single source of truth" if we look at this more holistically from BGP protocol perspective. We have two that have been implemented and deployed (even

[bess] Re: [Idr] Re: Do we need yet another link bandwidth community?

Hi ketan, Yes, I agree. Currently, the bandwidth definitions are spread across three different communities, resulting in inconsistent behavior and various restrictions across different address families. Additionally, EVPN's link bandwidth is also restricted to the specific routes' ES link ba

[bess] Re: [Idr] Re: Do we need yet another link bandwidth community?

https://xkcd.com/927/ ___ BESS mailing list -- bess@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to bess-le...@ietf.org

[bess] 答复: [Idr] Do we need yet another link bandwidth community?

Hi Ketan, Thank you for raising such an interesting topic. In fact, there are at least four drafts related to the link bandwidth extended community (see below), AFAIK. 1. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-07 2. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf

[bess] Re: [Idr] Re: Do we need yet another link bandwidth community?

Hi all, We will be publishing a new version of the draft https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-07.txt. We will add the new material presented in the IDR meeting on Monday in the draft. Thanks, --Satya On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 7:52 PM linchangwang wrote: > Hi ketan, > >

[bess] Re: [Idr] Do we need yet another link bandwidth community?

Hi Reshma and Ketan, It is good to see the link-bandwidth extended community in draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth is updated to support both transitive and non-transitive use cases. The limitation with non-transitive was one of the reasons of introducing the new extended community in draft-li-idr