Re: REG: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest/

Hi Luc,

Thanks for the comments. Appreciate it. I will get back.

Regards,
Sudhin



Juniper Business Use Only
From: Luc André Burdet <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 8:46 PM
To: Sudhin Jacob <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [bess] REG: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest/

Thanks for the head's up Sudhin.

I got as far as the TOC and associated document flow. I would suggest this needs work before WGLC.
A few suggestions based on cursory reading.



  1.  Section 2, Test topologies   (Nit: plural since you define 3...)

  *   Looks like you are defining only Single-Active?    (Nit:SHPE3 appears twice in its/box)
  *   You have only Figure1 and there are 3 topologies in there. Why not define 3 figures, one per topology ?
  *   The paging makes this section hard to read. Consider shrinking your diagrams.
  *   In fact, these are all the SAME Topology. All you are changing is the traffic pattern. Putting the details of traffic flow "per topology" and especially hiding those details in a one-liner behind "Traffic Generator" is not clear & concise.
  *   I would suggest:
     *   1 Figure detailing the physical network diagram defining node names, DUT, etc. ;
     *   A section defining "Test Topologies" overlayed onto that shared network diagram:
        *   Nit: by "different VLANs" do you mean "Multiple" here or that CE and SHPE3 have different VLANS from one another?)
        *   All-Active,  traffic SHPE3 -> CE direction
        *   All-Active,  traffic CE -> SHPE3 direction
        *   All-Active,  traffic SHPE3 <-> CE bidirectional
        *   Single-Active,  traffic SHPE3 -> CE direction
        *   Single-Active,  traffic CE -> SHPE3 direction
        *   Single-Active,  traffic SHPE3 <-> CE bidirectional
     *   That could fit nicely in a Table...


  1.  Repeating "How long it takes to learn" is redundant and makes the TOC needlessly unreadable.
This is a benchmarking draft, isn't timing and timing-verification implied?
If you MUST then just add a simple section/sentence at the top of document specifying that and do away with the repetition and long titles


  1.  You have PBB-EVPN in titles that basically repeat the previous one (presumably for EVPN?)
Maybe just have one section, and unnumbered subsections for EVPN and PBB-EVPN ?
or better yet: Section 3 EVPN, Section 4 PBB-EVPN and repeat same TCs concisely per technology. Context switching as one reads through the document hinders readability and flow.


   3<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf..org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dbmwg-2Devpntest-2D02-23section-2D3&d=DwMF-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=6467957JFOdmNjfKujkufIeAE-AdkLRewB-QhIU_Srw&m=KEdAQSnRSS33yC4oLGFN_oPFqpDbbKcDu7Mfvvk-DjI&s=NKvru-PiLhvvEAuqtcnC7TMWxb6UCSx-orKOo4qMAH4&e=>.  EVPN Test Cases

     3.1<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dbmwg-2Devpntest-2D02-23section-2D3.1&d=DwMF-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=6467957JFOdmNjfKujkufIeAE-AdkLRewB-QhIU_Srw&m=KEdAQSnRSS33yC4oLGFN_oPFqpDbbKcDu7Mfvvk-DjI&s=2NavS2cWAMnbCRNGfoOuY-NgQIw81CusOZyFmcHCWs4&e=>.  Local MAC learning

     3.2<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dbmwg-2Devpntest-2D02-23section-2D3.3&d=DwMF-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=6467957JFOdmNjfKujkufIeAE-AdkLRewB-QhIU_Srw&m=KEdAQSnRSS33yC4oLGFN_oPFqpDbbKcDu7Mfvvk-DjI&s=1FWoMqMdKZszJzPU9kXBGNITrTAsbf8wY35AhfaZ1Yw&e=>.  Remote MAC learning

     3.3.  Local MAC Flush, due to PE-CE link flap

        3.3.1 MAC Re-learning rate

     3.4.  Remote MAC Flush, due to remote link failure

   4<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf..org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dbmwg-2Devpntest-2D02-23section-2D3&d=DwMF-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=6467957JFOdmNjfKujkufIeAE-AdkLRewB-QhIU_Srw&m=KEdAQSnRSS33yC4oLGFN_oPFqpDbbKcDu7Mfvvk-DjI&s=NKvru-PiLhvvEAuqtcnC7TMWxb6UCSx-orKOo4qMAH4&e=>.  PBB-EVPN Test Cases

     4.1<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dbmwg-2Devpntest-2D02-23section-2D3.1&d=DwMF-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=6467957JFOdmNjfKujkufIeAE-AdkLRewB-QhIU_Srw&m=KEdAQSnRSS33yC4oLGFN_oPFqpDbbKcDu7Mfvvk-DjI&s=2NavS2cWAMnbCRNGfoOuY-NgQIw81CusOZyFmcHCWs4&e=>.  Local MAC learning

     4.2<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dbmwg-2Devpntest-2D02-23section-2D3.3&d=DwMF-g&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=6467957JFOdmNjfKujkufIeAE-AdkLRewB-QhIU_Srw&m=KEdAQSnRSS33yC4oLGFN_oPFqpDbbKcDu7Mfvvk-DjI&s=1FWoMqMdKZszJzPU9kXBGNITrTAsbf8wY35AhfaZ1Yw&e=>.  Remote MAC learning

     4.3.  Local MAC Flush, due to PE-CE link flap

        4.3.1 MAC Re-learning rate

     4.4.  Remote MAC Flush, due to remote link failure



Regards,
Luc André

Luc André Burdet |  Cisco  |  [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>  |  Tel: +1 613 254 4814


From: BESS <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Sudhin Jacob <sjacob=40juniper.net-Tr9gZwTxerDR74oF6e/[email protected]<mailto:sjacob=40juniper.net-Tr9gZwTxerDR74oF6e/[email protected]>>
Date: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 at 02:01
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [bess] REG: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest/

Hi All,

Our draft is going to be WGLC in BMWG workgroup. Could you please let us know any comments.

Regards,
Sudhin

Juniper Business Use Only

_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess