BESS Working Group Agenda IETF 108 Tuesday, July 28, 2020 11:00-12:40 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Status Chairs 15 min - No RFC since last IETF - 2 Document in RFC queue - Many document are in IESG review (details in Wiki) - VPLS draft had IPR issue which got addressed. - shepherded document list are up to date in Wiki Ongoing polls - - SD wan uses is missing one IPR Linda - all authors responded IPR. Stephane - missing reply from Bell Canada . no reply seen in mailing list. Linda - will follow up. - EVPN LSP ping has some comment from MPLS chairs. - Author need to address comment before moving forward. - EVPN Geneve draft has some comment in list which needs to be addressed before we can move forward. WG Draft : - after proxy draft being updated , there is progress made in per flow DF election draft. - Yang models are in same state as they were in interim meeting. - EVPN BFD is new working group draft. Adoption call queue : up to date in Wiki. draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-03 Gaurav 5 min - presented in IETF 98 first time - it has been presented in multiple IETF and updated based on draft. - updated some encoding from last IETF - security consideration section updated. - IANA allocation has been made - there is implementation existing across different vendor - draft is ready to move forward . Zhenbin li - this is important draft, this is well written draft. We need to have WGLC. multiple implementation exist. Matthew - it would be added to WGLC since WG thinks this is mature document to moce forward. Sussan Hares - Do i have other drafts in IDR which needed to be WGLC at same time ? Matthew - its good point, we had something similar issue in BESS, so it would be good if we take care of all cross reference. Stephane - There are few drafts which have normative reference in this document, it has normative reference to EVPN FXC draft. . Ketan - Reference was left over in error . This document does not have dependency on any IDR document. it has dependency on SR network programming which is in Spring and AD evaluation. Stephane - please remove reference to FXC Gaurav - it would be removed. Susan - if you have any other draft which would help in deployment, please let me know. draft-ietf-bess-evpn-unequal-lb Neeraj 5 min - draft address some section and add more detail - this have been presented to many IETF. - Defines new EC for EVPN. john - some time it would be transitive or not depending on logic on border router Ali - Yes John - can you do non transitive because border router originating new community. Ali - We did considered. and ran into issue that existing deployments have used this existing EC they would have issue . interop may be issue. For new EC, this can be done. draft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast draft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast-controller draft-zzhang-bess-bgp-multicast-sr Jeffrey zhang 15 min - some of the section modified in this document. - multiple domain support added in controller draft - TEA enhancements were added in draft. - incoming label stack got added to support MP2MP - multi domain support added for controller based multicast - IDR would also be presented with TEA changes Susan - TEA changes are being made Zeffery - would be presented more detail in IDR Susan - TEA questions would be asked in IDR session. parekh-bess-mvpn-evpn-sr-p2mp Rishabh Parekh 10 min - New draft , EVPN and mVPN service over SR P2MP tree - 0th version, expecting comments and questions for draft. draft-dunbar-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage Linda Dunbar 10 min - new charaterstic added for SDWAN - multiple SDWAN instances got added - Adoption is requested. Adrian Farrel - I have some comment on term Application, comment to be provided in list. draft-kompella-mpls-nffrr-00 Wen Lin 10 min - 0th version of draft, more discussion is needed in this topic from WG. Jorge - slides talks about EVPN, IPvpn and draft (section 2.1 ) its mentioning VPLS too Wen - yes, it's applicable for VPLS too . Needs more clarification. Jorge - can this happen with VPLS too Wen - If VPLS supports Active Standby , it may. will clarify more. Jorge - EVPN case it would be good to add more detail how it would be handling multicast traffic. Ali - instead of using FRR label, use implicitly instead of explicitly Wen - if same label is used, PE1 sends FRR traffic to PE2. and if PE1 uses VPN label from PE2 it would not have way to determine whether its FRR traffic or remote . draft-sajassi-bess-secure-evpn-02 Ali sajassi 10 min - Secure control beteen each PE and RR - authors looking for adoption call - Susan : We went through this in IETF105 to work on security issues. IPSEC tunnel in slide is not in draft. what is the difference between slides and draft. - Ali - Encap is IPSEC tunnel, but you can use tunnel over UDP. VxIPSec tunnel describes for VxLAN. - Susan - you defined new tunnel type. it may be same things where other WG working on similar. why need new tunnel. Draft does not ready for adoption. - Ali - if things are not clear, can you send email over list and we can clarify. - Susan - it may not be clarification and it may be more changes in draft. - Ali - We did look at available tunnel type and did not find any thing to use. - Susan - will send reference & email over list. draft-schmutzer-bess-ple-00 draft-schmutzer-bess-ple-vpws-signalling-00 Christian 10 min jorge - why is this draft in BESS. i do not see any thing related to BGP Christian - this draft would be move to different WG Stephane - its individual draft , it does not belong to any WG Mathew - chairs would discuss this and see how to move it . -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------