INTERNET-DRAFT Sami Boutros
Intended Status: Standard Track VMware
Ali Sajassi
Samer Salam
Cisco Systems
John Drake
Juniper Networks
Jeff Tantsura
Ericsson
Dirk Steinberg
Steinberg Consulting
Thomas Beckhaus
Deutsche Telecom
J. Rabadan
Alcatel-Lucent
Expires: September 17, 2016 March 16, 2016
VPWS support in EVPN
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-03.txt
Abstract
This document describes how EVPN can be used to support virtual
private wire service (VPWS) in MPLS/IP networks. EVPN enables the
following characteristics for VPWS: single-active as well as all-
active multi-homing with flow-based load-balancing, eliminates the
need for single-segment and multi-segment PW signaling, and provides
fast protection using data-plane prefix independent convergence upon
node or link failure.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2 Service interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 VLAN-Based Service Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 VLAN Bundle Service Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.1 Port-Based Service Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 VLAN-Aware Bundle Service Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4 Flexible CrossConnect Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. BGP Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1 EVPN Layer 2 attributes extended community . . . . . . . . . 9
4 Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5 EVPN Comparison to PW Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6 ESI Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7 Failure Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 2]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
7.1 Single-Homed CEs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2 Multi-Homed CEs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8 VPWS with multiple sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
11 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 3]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
1 Introduction
This document describes how EVPN can be used to support virtual
private wire service (VPWS) in MPLS/IP networks. The use of EVPN
mechanisms for VPWS brings the benefits of EVPN to p2p services.
These benefits include single-active redundancy as well as all-active
redundancy with flow-based load-balancing. Furthermore, the use of
EVPN for VPWS eliminates the need for signaling single-segment and
multi-segment PWs for p2p Ethernet services.
[EVPN] has the ability to forward customer traffic to/from a given
customer Attachment Circuit (AC), aka Ethernet Segment in EVPN
terminology, without any MAC lookup. This capability is ideal in
providing p2p services (aka VPWS services). [MEF] defines Ethernet
Virtual Private Line (EVPL) service as p2p service between a pair of
ACs (designated by VLANs) and Ethernet Private Line (EPL) service, in
which all traffic flows are between a single pair of ESes. EVPL can
be considered as a VPWS with only two ACs. In delivering an EVPL
service, the traffic forwarding capability of EVPN based on the
exchange of a pair of Ethernet AD routes is used; whereas, for more
general VPWS, traffic forwarding capability of EVPN based on the
exchange of a group of Ethernet AD routes (one Ethernet AD route per
AC/segment) is used. In a VPWS service, the traffic from an
originating Ethernet Segment can be forwarded only to a single
destination Ethernet Segment; hence, no MAC lookup is needed and the
MPLS label associated with the per-EVI Ethernet AD route can be used
in forwarding user traffic to the destination AC.
Both services are supported by using the Ethernet A-D per EVI route
which contains an Ethernet Segment Identifier, in which the customer
ES is encoded, and an Ethernet Tag, in which the VPWS service
instance identifier is encoded. I.e., for both EPL and EVPL
services, a specific VPWS service instance is identified by a pair of
Ethernet A-D per EVI routes which together identify the VPWS service
instance endpoints and the VPWS service instance. In the control
plane the VPWS service instance is identified using the VPWS service
instance identifiers advertised by each PE and in the data plane the
MPLS label advertised by one PE is used by the other PE to send
traffic for that VPWS service instance. As with the Ethernet Tag in
standard EVPN, the VPWS service instance identifier has uniqueness
within an EVPN instance.
Unlike EVPN where Ethernet Tag ID in EVPN routes are set to zero for
Port-based, vlan-based, and vlan-bundle interface mode and it is set
to non-zero Ethernet tag ID for vlan-aware bundle mode, in EVPN-VPWS,
for all the four interface modes, Ethernet tag ID in the Ethernet A-D
route MUST be set to a valid value.
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 4]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
In terms of route advertisement and MPLS label lookup behavior, EVPN-
VPWS resembles the vlan-aware bundle mode of [RFC 7432] such that
when a PE advertises Ethernet A-D per EVI route, the VPWS service
instance serves as a 24-bit normalized Ethernet tag ID. The MPLS
label in this route represents both the EVI and the VPWS service
instance, so that upon receiving an MPLS encapsulated packet, the
disposition PE can identify the egress AC from the lookup of the MPLS
label alone and perform any required tag translation. For EVPL
service, the Ethernet frames transported over an MPLS/IP network MUST
remain tagged with the originating VID and any VID translation is
performed at the disposition PE. For EPL service, the Ethernet frames
are transported as is and the tags are not altered.
The Ethernet Segment identifier encoded in the Ethernet A-D per EVI
route is not used to identify the service, however it can be used for
flow-based load-balancing and mass withdraw functions.
As with standard EVPN, the Ethernet A-D per ES route is used for fast
convergence upon link or node failure and the Ethernet Segment route
is used for auto-discovery of the PEs attached to a given multi-homed
CE and to synchronize state between them.
1.1 Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
MAC: Media Access Control
MPLS: Multi Protocol Label Switching.
OAM: Operations, Administration and Maintenance.
PE: Provide Edge Node.
CE: Customer Edge device e.g., host or router or switch.
EVPL: Ethernet Virtual Private Line.
EPL: Ethernet Private Line.
VPWS: Virtual private wire service.
EVI: EVPN Instance.
Single-Active Mode: When a device or a network is multi-homed to two
or more PEs and when only a single PE in such redundancy group can
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 5]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
forward traffic to/from the multi-homed device or network for a given
VLAN, then such multi-homing or redundancy is referred to as "Single-
Active".
All-Active: When a device is multi-homed to two or more PEs and when
all PEs in such redundancy group can forward traffic to/from the
multi-homed device for a given VLAN, then such multi-homing or
redundancy is referred to as "All-Active".
1.2 Requirements
1. EPL service access circuit maps to the whole Ethernet port.
2. EVPL service access circuits are VLANs on single or double tagged
trunk ports. Each VLAN individually will be considered to be an
endpoint for an EVPL service, without any direct dependency on any
other VLANs on the trunk. Other VLANs on the same trunk could also be
used for EVPL services, but could also be associated with other
services.
3. If multiple VLANs on the same trunk are associated with EVPL
services, the respective remote endpoints of these EVPLs could be
dispersed across any number of PEs, i.e. different VLANs may lead to
different destinations.
4. The VLAN tag on the access trunk only has PE-local significance.
The VLAN tag on the remote end could be different, and could also be
double tagged when the other side is single tagged.
5. Also, multiple EVPL service VLANs on the same trunk could belong
to the same EVPN instance (EVI), or they could belong to different
EVIs. This should be purely an administrative choice of the network
operator.
6. A given access trunk could have hundreds of EVPL services, and a
given PE could have thousands of EVPLs configured. It must be
possible to configure multiple EVPL services within the same EVI.
7. Local access circuits configured to belong to a given EVPN
instance could also belong to different physical access trunks.
8. EPL-LAN and EVP-LAN are possible on the same system and also ESIs
can be shared between EVPL and EVP-LANs.
2 Service interface
2.1 VLAN-Based Service Interface
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 6]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
With this service interface, a VPWS instance identifier corresponds
to only a single VLAN on a specific interface. Therefore, there is a
one-to-one mapping between a VID on this interface and the VPWS
service instance identifier. The PE provides the cross-connect
functionality between MPLS LSP identified by the VPWS service
instance identifier and a specific <port,VLAN>. If the VLAN is
represented by different VIDs on different PEs. (e.g., a different
VID per Ethernet segment per PE), then each PE needs to perform VID
translation for frames destined to its Ethernet segment. In such
scenarios, the Ethernet frames transported over an MPLS/IP network
SHOULD remain tagged with the originating VID, and a VID translation
MUST be supported in the data path and MUST be performed on the
disposition PE.
2.2 VLAN Bundle Service Interface
With this service interface, a VPWS service instance identifier
corresponds to multiple VLANs on a specific interface. The PE
provides the cross-connect functionality between MPLS LSP identified
by the VPWS service instance identifier and a group of VLANs on a
specific interface. For this service interface, each VLAN is
presented by a single VID which means no VLAN translation is allowed.
The receiving PE, can direct the traffic based on EVPN label alone to
a specific port. The transmitting PE can corss connect traffic from a
group of VLANs on a specific port to the MPLS LSP. The MPLS-
encapsulated frames MUST remain tagged with the originating VID.
2.2.1 Port-Based Service Interface
This service interface is a special case of the VLAN bundle service
interface, where all of the VLANs on the port are mapped to the same
VPWS service instance identifier. The procedures are identical to
those described in Section 6.2.
2.3 VLAN-Aware Bundle Service Interface
Contrary to EVPN, in EVPN-VPWS this service interface maps to VLAN-
based service interface (defined in section 6.1) and thus this
service interface is not used in EVPN-VPWS. In other words, if one
tries to define data-plane and control plane behavior for this
service interface, he would realize that it is the same as that of
VLAN-based service.
2.4 Flexible CrossConnect Service
This service provides the ultimate flexibility at the expense of
additional lookup. With this EVPN-VPWS service a large number of
attachments circuits (ACs), each of which represented by either
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 7]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
single VLAN tag or double VLAN tags (QinQ) across multiple endpoints,
are multiplexed in a single EVPN-VPWS service instance. An endpoint
can be a physical interface, VSI, an IP-VRF, a MAC-VRF, or any other
endpoint where cross-connection of the associated AC is desired.
Because in this service mode, aggregation is performed across
multiple endpoints, besides MPLS label, an additional VLAN ID lookup
(either single tag or double tag) needs to be performed at the
disposition PE in order to identify the destination endpoint. One can
think of this as, the EVPN label identifies a cross-connect table and
then a single tag (or double tag) lookup is performed to identify the
endpoint. Each cross-connect table has its own unique VLAN space
which mean it can have upto 4K single-tag VLAN (or upto 16M double-
tag VLANs). VLAN IDs can be overlap across different cross-connect
tables but MUST be unique within a table.
The EVPN label besides identifying the cross-connect table, also
identifies the following types of VID look-ups: Single VID lookup:
The disposition PE MUST support single VID lookup where upon outer-
VID lookup, the destination end-point is identified. Double VID
lookup: The disposition PE MUST support double VID lookup where upon
outer most two VIDs lookup, the destination end-point is identified.
Wildcard VID Lookup: The disposition PE MAY support special double
VID lookup where the first VID is outer most VID and the 2nd VID is
the wild card (*).
If no entry is found upon the lookup, a counter per cross-connect
table is incremented. Upon finding an entry and identifying the
destination endpoint, the packet is forwarded to that destination
endpoint. Any further tag manipulation such as re-write (single or
double), addition, deletion (single or double) will be performed at
the endpoint.
On the imposition PE, by associating an attachment circuit to an
EVPN-VPWS service instance ID, we basically associate that attachment
circuit with the corresponding cross-connect table.
Since VID lookup (single or double) needs to be performed at the
disposition PE, then VID normalization MUST be performed prior to the
MPLS encapsulation on the ingress PE. This requires that both
imposition and disposition PE devices be capable of VLAN tag
manipulation, such as re-write (single or double), addition, deletion
(single or double), at their endpoints (e.g., their physical
interfaces).
3. BGP Extensions
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 8]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
This document proposes the use of the Ethernet A-D per EVI route to
signal VPWS services. The Ethernet Segment Identifier field is set to
the customer ES and the Ethernet Tag ID 32-bit field is set to the
24-bit VPWS service instance identifier. For both EPL and EVPL
services, for a given VPWS service instance the pair of PEs
instantiating that VPWS service instance will each advertise an
Ethernet A-D per EVI route with its VPWS service instance identifier
and will each be configured with the other PE's VPWS service instance
identifier. When each PE has received the other PE's Ethernet A-D per
EVI route the VPWS service instance is instantiated. It should be
noted that the same VPWS service instance identifier may be
configured on both PEs.
The Route-Target (RT) extended community with which the Ethernet A-D
per EVI route is tagged identifies the EVPN instance in which the
VPWS service instance is configured. It is the operator's choice as
to how many and which VPWS service instances are configured in a
given EVPN instance. However, a given EVPN instance MUST NOT be
configured with both VPWS service instances and standard EVPN multi-
point services.
3.1 EVPN Layer 2 attributes extended community
This draft proposes a new extended community, defined below, to be
included with Ethernet A-D per EVI route. This attribute is mandatory
if multihoming is enabled.
+------------------------------------+
| Type(0x06)/Sub-type(TBD)(2 octet) |
+------------------------------------+
| Control Flags (2 octets) |
+------------------------------------+
| L2 MTU (2 octets) |
+------------------------------------+
| Reserved (2 octets) |
+------------------------------------+
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MBZ |C|P|B| (MBZ = MUST Be Zero)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The following bits in the Control Flags are defined; the remaining
bits MUST be set to zero when sending and MUST be ignored when
receiving this community.
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 9]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
Name Meaning
P If set to 1 in multihoming single active scenarios, it
indicates that the advertising PE is the Primary PE.
SHOULD be set to 1 for multihoming all active scenarios.
B If set to 1 in multihoming single active scenarios, it
indicates that the advertising PE is the Backup PE.
C If set to 1, a Control word [RFC 4448] MUST be present
when sending EVPN packets to this PE.
A received L2 MTU=0 means no MTU checking against local MTU is
needed. A received non-zero MTU SHOULD be checked against local MTU
and if there is a mismatch, the local PE MUST not add the remote PE
as the EVPN destination for corresponding VPWS service instance.
The usage of the Per ES Ethernet AD route is unchanged from its usage
in [RFC7432], i.e. the "Single-Active" bit in the flags of the ESI
Label extended community will indicate if single active or all active
redundancy is used for this ES.
In multihoming single active scenario, a remote PE receiving P=1 from
more than one PE will select only one primary PE when forwarding
traffic. A remote PE receiving B=1 from more than one PE will select
only one backup PE. A remote PE MUST receive P=1 from at least one PE
before forwarding traffic.
As per [RFC6790], if a network uses entropy labels then the control
word (C bit set) SHOULD not be used when sending EVPN-encapsulated
packets over a P2P LSP.
4 Operation
The following figure shows an example of a P2P service deployed with
EVPN.
Ethernet Ethernet
Native |<--------- EVPN Instance ----------->| Native
Service | | Service
(AC) | |<-PSN1->| |<-PSN2->| | (AC)
| V V V V V V |
| +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ |
+----+ | | PE1 |======|ASBR1|==|ASBR2|===| PE3 | | +----+
| |-------+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+-------| |
| CE1| | | |CE2 |
| |-------+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+-------| |
+----+ | | PE2 |======|ASBR3|==|ASBR4|===| PE4 | | +----+
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 10]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
^ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ ^
| Provider Edge 1 ^ Provider Edge 2 |
| | |
| | |
| EVPN Inter-provider point |
| |
|<---------------- Emulated Service -------------------->|
iBGP sessions are established between PE1, PE2, ASBR1 and ASBR3,
possibly via a BGP route-reflector. Similarly, iBGP sessions are
established between PE3, PE4, ASBR2 and ASBR4. eBGP sessions are
established among ASBR1, ASBR2, ASBR3, and ASBR4.
All PEs and ASBRs are enabled for the EVPN SAFI and exchange Ethernet
A-D per EVI routes, one route per VPWS service instance. For inter-
AS option B, the ASBRs re-advertise these routes with Next Hop
attribute set to their IP addresses. The link between the CE and the
PE is either a C-tagged or S-tagged interface, as described in
[802.1Q], that can carry a single VLAN tag or two nested VLAN tags
and it is configured as a trunk with multiple VLANs, one per VPWS
service instance. It should be noted that the VLAN ID used by the
customer at either end of a VPWS service instance to identify that
service instance may be different and EVPN doesn't perform that
translation between the two values. Rather, the MPLS label will
identify the VPWS service instance and if translation is needed, it
should be done by the Ethernet interface for each service.
For single-homed CE, in an advertised Ethernet A-D per EVI route the
ESI field is set to 0 and the Ethernet Tag field is set to the VPWS
service instance identifier that identifies the EVPL or EPL service.
For a multi-homed CE, in an advertised Ethernet A-D per EVI route the
ESI field is set to the CE's ESI and the Ethernet Tag field is set to
the VPWS service instance identifier, which MUST have the same value
on all PEs attached to that ES. This allows an ingress PE to perform
flow-based load-balancing of traffic flows to all of the PEs attached
to that ES. In all cases traffic follows the transport paths, which
may be asymmetric.
The VPWS service instance identifier encoded in the Ethernet Tag
field in an advertised Ethernet A-D per EVI route MUST either be
unique across all ASs, or an ASBR needs to perform a translation when
the Ethernet A-D per EVI route is re-advertised by the ASBR from one
AS to the other AS.
Ethernet A-D per ES route can be used for mass withdraw to withdraw
all Ethernet A-D per EVI routes associated with the multi-home site
on a given PE.
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 11]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
5 EVPN Comparison to PW Signaling
In EVPN, service endpoint discovery and label signaling are done
concurrently using BGP. Whereas, with VPWS based on [RFC4448], label
signaling is done via LDP and service endpoint discovery is either
through manual provisioning or through BGP.
In existing implementation of VPWS using pseudowires(PWs), redundancy
is limited to single-active mode, while with EVPN implementation of
VPWS both single-active and all-active redundancy modes can be
supported.
In existing implementation with PWs, backup PWs are not used to carry
traffic, while with EVPN, traffic can be load-balanced among
different PEs multi-homed to a single CE.
Upon link or node failure, EVPN can trigger failover with the
withdrawal of a single BGP route per EVPL service or multiple EVPL
services, whereas with VPWS PW redundancy, the failover sequence
requires exchange of two control plane messages: one message to
deactivate the group of primary PWs and a second message to activate
the group of backup PWs associated with the access link. Finally,
EVPN may employ data plane local repair mechanisms not available in
VPWS.
6 ESI Bandwidth
The ESI Bandwidth will be encoded using the Link Bandwidth Extended
community defined in [draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth] and associated
with the Ethernet AD route used to realize the EVPL services.
When a PE receives this attribute for a given EVPL it MUST request
the required bandwidth from the PSN towards the other EVPL service
destination PE originating the message. When resources are allocated
from the PSN for a given EVPL service, then the PSN SHOULD account
for the Bandwidth requested by this EVPL service.
In the case where PSN resources are not available, the PE receiving
this attribute MUST re-send its local Ethernet AD routes for this
EVPL service with the ESI Bandwidth = All FFs to declare that the
"PSN Resources Unavailable".
The scope of the ESI Bandwidth is limited to only one Autonomous
System.
7 Failure Scenarios
On a link or port failure between the CE and the PE for both single
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 12]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
and multi-homed CEs, the PE must withdraw all the associated Ethernet
AD routes for the VPWS service instances on the failed port or link.
7.1 Single-Homed CEs
Unlike [EVPN], EVPN-VPWS uses Ethernet AD route advertisements for
single-homed Ethernet Segments. Therefore, upon a link/port failure
of this single-homed Ethernet Segment, the PE MUST withdraw the
associated Ethernet A-D routes.
7.2 Multi-Homed CEs
For a faster convergence in multi-homed scenarios with either Single-
Active Redundancy or All-active redundancy, mass withdraw technique
as per [EVPN] baseline is used. A PE previously advertising an
Ethernet A-D per ES route, can withdraw this route signaling to the
remote PEs to switch all the VPWS service instances associated with
this multi-homed ES to the backup PE
8 VPWS with multiple sites
The VPWS among multiple sites (full mesh of P2P connections - one per
pair of sites) that can be setup automatically without any explicit
provisioning of P2P connections among the sites is outside the scope
of this document.
9 Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Wen Lin, Nitin Singh, Senthil
Sathappan and Vinod Prabhu for their feedback and contributions to
this document.
10 Security Considerations
This document does not introduce any additional security constraints.
11 IANA Considerations
Allocation of Extended Community Type and Sub-Type for EVPN L2
attributes.
12 References
12.1 Normative References
[KEYWORDS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 13]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
12.2 Informative References
[RFC7209] A. Sajassi, R. Aggarwal et. al., "Requirements for Ethernet
VPN".
[RFC7432] A. Sajassi, R. Aggarwal et. al., "BGP MPLS Based Ethernet
VPN".
[PBB-EVPN] A. Sajassi et. al., "PBB-EVPN", draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-evpn-
08.txt.
[RFC4761] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Virtual Private LAN Service
(VPLS) Using BGP for Auto-Discovery and Signaling", RFC4761, January
2007.
[draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth] P. Mohapatra, R. Fernando, "BGP Link
Bandwidth Extended Community", draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth-06.txt
Authors' Addresses
Sami Boutros
VMware, Inc.
Email: sboutros@vmware.com
Ali Sajassi
Cisco
Email: sajassi@cisco.com
Samer Salam
Cisco
Email: ssalam@cisco.com
John Drake
Juniper Networks
Email: jdrake@juniper.net
Jeff Tantsura
Ericsson
Email: jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com
Dirk Steinberg
Steinberg Consulting
Email: dws@steinbergnet.net
Patrice Brissette
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 14]
INTERNET DRAFT VPWS support in EVPN March 16, 2016
Cisco
Email: pbrisset@cisco.com
Thomas Beckhaus
Deutsche Telecom
Email:Thomas.Beckhaus@telekom.de>
Jorge Rabadan
Alcatel-Lucent
Email: jorge.rabadan@alcatel-lucent.com
Ryan Bickhart
Juniper Networks
Email: rbickhart@juniper.net
Boutros Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 15]
