Last Call Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-09
review-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-09-opsdir-lc-jaeggli-2020-07-06-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 15) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
| Deadline | 2020-07-03 | |
| Requested | 2020-06-19 | |
| Authors | Ali Sajassi , Samer Salam , Samir Thoria , John Drake , Jorge Rabadan | |
| I-D last updated | 2023-10-20 (Latest revision 2021-07-26) | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -09
by Russ White
(diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -09 by Joel Jaeggli (diff) Secdir IETF Last Call review of -09 by Chris M. Lonvick (diff) Secdir Telechat review of -14 by Chris M. Lonvick (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Joel Jaeggli |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/AbjpyP0hM1oWGRzfnMl6CTN0OuM | |
| Reviewed revision | 09 (document currently at 15) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2020-07-06 |
review-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-09-opsdir-lc-jaeggli-2020-07-06-00
greetings, I have reviewed draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding on behalf of the ops directorate. as a datacenter operator something of a conflict appears for me in this work in that I struggle with the state explosion that IRBs each host / subnet represent on the PE switches. As the document says: In other words, each PE participating in asymmetric IRB MUST maintain ARP entries for remote hosts (hosts connected to other PEs) as well as maintain MAC-VRFs/BTs and IRB interfaces for ALL subnets in an IP VRF including subnets that may not be locally attached. We designed ourselves into a corner where we need this document. it would be helpful if section 4 would be more explicit for non-implementors on when symetric or asymetric modules would be chosen, as it stands the variation basically reads like the enumeration of the features of various implementations. I think this document is ready to proceed and it clearly addresses needs in these implementations. joel