Hi Dinesh,
as I understand, Sridhar is on vacation. In the meantime, this is his
response to the question on using VTEP's MAC address as the destination MAC
in the inner Ethernet frame:
T. Sridhar
Sun, Jun 30, 7:13 PM
to Reshad, Martin, draft-ietf-bfd-vx...@ietf.org, Matthew, Sam, Jeffrey
Reshad,
I don't understand his objection. My recommendation is to understand that
before we propose new text. I fear otherwise that we'll have a new draft in
a few months to address the issue of using non-mgmt VNI.
Dinesh
On Jul 31, 2019, 12:07 PM -0700, Greg Mirsky , wrote:
Hi Dinesh,
if I recall corre
I understand his point now. It arose in my head because of a difference in
perspective. On a hardware switch, pretty much every implementation I've
seen reuses one of the device's MAC address across all the local VNIs. Even
in VMW's case, Even on a server, NIC's MAC address is by default reused
acr
Les,
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 12:23:05AM +, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote:
> I have a related question:
>
> In the case where the BGP neighbor is multiple hops away, what benefit does
> BFD dampening provide?
> (Note that I am assuming that there likely would be single hop BFD sessions
> use
