1. WG Status Thomas and Martin, 10 min
2. Label Sharing for Fast PE Protection
Slides: Label sharing for Fast PE Protection
I-D: draft-zhang-l3vpn-label-sharing-02
Mingui, 15 min
Wim: Two IETFs ago we discussed the fact existing solutions [context label] are available, why do we need this proposal? Only needed if something is really wrong with what currently exists.
Mingui: Ok, there is an I-D discussing context labels for egress PE protection.
Wim: Yes, but if existing solutions exist do we need a new one?
Chairs: [To presenter] a number of comments have been made previously on the mailing list, please respond.
3. Ingress Replication Tunnels in Multicast VPN
Slides: Multicast VPN ingress replication
ID: draft-rosen-l3vpn-ir-01
Eric, 15 min
Lenny: (clarification that what is called P2P/unicst tunnels, is here most often MP2P tunnels)
Thomas: Without my chair hat, I just want support the work.
Chairs: Polled the room - Good support in favour, none against.
4. FIB Reduction in Virtual Subnets
Slides: Virtual subnet FIB reduction
I-D: draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet-fib-reduction-00 Xiaohu, 10 min
Chairs: Who thinks this is worth documenting? [To Xiaohu] There is a need to engage with a wider group as there is not a lot of support currently
5. draft-hao-l3vpn-inter-nvo3-vpn-00
Weigo, 10 min
Robert(Sharam?): Are you saying there’s no VRF on ASBR 1, or ASBR 2, so when you receive packets from an MPLS network on ASBR 1, how do you know who to send it to if you’re not using VRF’s?
Thomas, co-chair: Just like basic MPLS VPN option B you do not have VRF’s on ASBR’s.
Robert(Sharam?): Without an IP look up how do you forward the packet?
Weigo: one-to-one translation
Nabil: one-to one is ok but aggregation/multiplexing becomes a problem, unless you use a VRF.
Weigo: yes we would need a lookup on ASBR1.
Nabil: what is your intention with the document, is it informational?
Chairs: Let’s take this discussion (intended status and clarification of multi-tenant scenarios) to the list.
6. Virtual Topologies for Service Chaining in BGP/IP MPLS VPNs
Slides: L3VPN service-chaining
I-D: draft-rfernando-l3vpn-service-chaining-04
Dhananjaya, 10 min
Chairs: Polled the room for adoption. Good support, no-one against.
Wim: A clarification question, for SFC you have classifiers, is it correct to assume that this solution will only work with destination-based forwarding?
Rao: No, this solution also support the use of a classifier. Tthere are a few things that can be added to make the end-to-end path clearer. We intend to discuss this further in the document, including Flow Spec. Adding this will make it clearer.
7. BGP/MPLS VPN Virtual PE
Slides: Virtual PE
I-D: draft-fang-l3vpn-virtual-pe-05
Luyuan, 10 min
No comments.
Chairs: Polled the room - Good support in favour / none against.
8. Requirements for Extending BGP/MPLS VPNs to End-Systems
Slides: L3VPN End-system requirements
I-D: draft-fang-l3vpn-end-system-requirements-03
Luyuan, 5 min
Chairs: Polled the room – A handful of supporters, and people willing to review the document. With those reviews please provide the names.
9. Multicast VPN fast upstream failover
Slides: mVPN fast failover
I-D: draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-fast-failover-06
Robert, 5 min
No comments.
A handful having read the document.