Subject: [mpls] Question regarding MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS Dual-homed MTU-s

From: "Asaf Henig" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 11:11:32 +0300

6.5.7638.1">
<TITLE>Question regarding MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS Dual-homed MTU-s =
</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>It is yet unclear from draft <A =
HREF=3D"http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-09.=
txt">http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-09.txt=
</A> who is responsible to send the MAC Withdrawal message to the =
secondary PE-rs when fail-over occures in an H-VPLS dual homed MTU-s =
scenario.<BR>
<BR>
It is known that when a primary VC fails in a dual-homing scenario the =
PE-rs connected to the secondary VC should relearn the MAC addresses =
behind the MTU-s. In order to make this process faster this =
&quot;secondary&quot; PE-rs should flush the relevant previously learned =
MAC addresses. For that to happen we have two options:<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;<BR>
A) The primary PE-rs would send the MAC Withdrawal message to the =
secondary PE-rs (and all other PE-s) the minute it recognizes that its =
VC has failed.<BR>
B) The MTU-s itself would send the MAC Withdrawal to the secondary PE-rs =
the minute it switches from primary to secondary VC. The secondary PE-rs =
would be responsible to propegate this message to all other PEs in the =
VPLS domain (this option is recommended by =
draft-pdutta-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-mac-opt-00.txt).<BR>
<BR>
Which option is preferred&nbsp; ?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for any help.&nbsp;&nbsp;<BR>
Asaf Henig<BR>
MRV communications<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C6E143.60C5C9D2--

--===============0629203724==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--===============0629203724==--