draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-02.txt   draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-03.txt 
skipping to change at page 1, line 14 skipping to change at page 1, line 14
Internet Draft Nokia Internet Draft Nokia
S. Mohanty, Ed. S. Mohanty, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track A. Sajassi Intended status: Standards Track A. Sajassi
Cisco Cisco
J. Drake J. Drake
Juniper Juniper
K. Nagaraj K. Nagaraj
S. Sathappan S. Sathappan
Nokia Nokia
Expires: November 24, 2018 May 23, 2018 Expires: November 25, 2018 May 24, 2018
Framework for EVPN Designated Forwarder Election Extensibility Framework for EVPN Designated Forwarder Election Extensibility
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-02 draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-03
Abstract Abstract
The Designated Forwarder (DF) in EVPN networks is the PE responsible The Designated Forwarder (DF) in EVPN networks is the PE responsible
for sending broadcast, unknown unicast and multicast (BUM) traffic to for sending broadcast, unknown unicast and multicast (BUM) traffic to
a multi-homed CE, on a given VLAN on a particular Ethernet Segment a multi-homed CE, on a given VLAN on a particular Ethernet Segment
(ES). The DF is selected out of a list of candidate PEs that (ES). The DF is selected out of a list of candidate PEs that
advertise the same Ethernet Segment Identifier (ESI) to the EVPN advertise the same Ethernet Segment Identifier (ESI) to the EVPN
network. By default, EVPN uses a DF Election algorithm referred to as network. By default, EVPN uses a DF Election algorithm referred to as
"Service Carving" and it is based on a modulus function (V mod N) "Service Carving" and it is based on a modulus function (V mod N)
skipping to change at page 6, line 43 skipping to change at page 6, line 43
changes to the default DF Election algorithm, but they do not require changes to the default DF Election algorithm, but they do not require
any changes to the EVPN Route exchange and have minimal changes to any changes to the EVPN Route exchange and have minimal changes to
their content per se. their content per se.
In addition, there is a need to extend the DF Election procedures so In addition, there is a need to extend the DF Election procedures so
that new algorithms and capabilities are possible. A single algorithm that new algorithms and capabilities are possible. A single algorithm
(the default DF Election algorithm) may not meet the requirements in (the default DF Election algorithm) may not meet the requirements in
all the use-cases. all the use-cases.
Note that while [RFC7432] elects a DF per <ES, EVI>, this document Note that while [RFC7432] elects a DF per <ES, EVI>, this document
elects a DF per <ES, BD>. This means that unlike [RFC 7432], where elects a DF per <ES, BD>. This means that unlike [RFC7432], where for
for a VLAN Aware Bundle service EVI there is only one DF for the EVI, a VLAN Aware Bundle service EVI there is only one DF for the EVI,
this document specifies that there will be multiple DFs, one for each this document specifies that there will be multiple DFs, one for each
BD configured in that EVI. BD configured in that EVI.
2.2. Problem Statement 2.2. Problem Statement
This section describes some potential issues on the default DF This section describes some potential issues on the default DF
Election algorithm. Election algorithm.
2.2.1. Unfair Load-Balancing and Service Disruption 2.2.1. Unfair Load-Balancing and Service Disruption
skipping to change at page 24, line 40 skipping to change at page 24, line 40
November 2000, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2991>. November 2000, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2991>.
[RFC2992] Hopps, C., "Analysis of an Equal-Cost Multi-Path [RFC2992] Hopps, C., "Analysis of an Equal-Cost Multi-Path
Algorithm", RFC 2992, DOI 10.17487/RFC2992, November 2000, Algorithm", RFC 2992, DOI 10.17487/RFC2992, November 2000,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2992>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2992>.
10. Acknowledgments 10. Acknowledgments
The authors want to thank Sriram Venkateswaran, Laxmi Padakanti, The authors want to thank Sriram Venkateswaran, Laxmi Padakanti,
Ranganathan Boovaraghavan, Tamas Mondal, Sami Boutros, Jakob Heitz, Ranganathan Boovaraghavan, Tamas Mondal, Sami Boutros, Jakob Heitz,
Mrinmoy Ghosh, Leo Mermelstein, Mankamna Misra and Samir Thoria for Mrinmoy Ghosh, Leo Mermelstein, Mankamana Mishra and Samir Thoria for
their review and contributions. Special thanks to Stephane Litkowski their review and contributions. Special thanks to Stephane Litkowski
for his thorough review and detailed contributions. for his thorough review and detailed contributions.
11. Contributors 11. Contributors
In addition to the authors listed on the front page, the following In addition to the authors listed on the front page, the following
coauthors have also contributed to this document: coauthors have also contributed to this document:
Antoni Przygienda Antoni Przygienda
Juniper Networks, Inc. Juniper Networks, Inc.
 End of changes. 4 change blocks. 
5 lines changed or deleted 5 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/