|
|
1 |
(% class="row" %) |
|
|
2 |
((( |
|
|
3 |
(% class="col-xs-12 col-sm-8 test-report-content" %) |
|
|
4 |
((( |
|
|
5 |
---- |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
E-Line service provides dedicated point-to-point connectivity between two sites. For scenarios where a central location, such as a headquarter, must connect to multiple branch offices, a point-to-multipoint service is required. E-Tree service addresses this requirement by enabling a single root node to connect to multiple leaf nodes, as many as the customer requires. Its key distinction is that the root can communicate with all other roots and its own leaves, whereas leaves can communicate only with the defined root. |
|
|
8 |
In our test, we followed the scenarios 1 and 2 described in RFC 8317, section 3, namely “leaf or root site per PE” and “leaf or root per AC”. In the leaf or root site per PE scenario, a PE may receive traffic from either Root ACs or Leaf ACs for a given MAC-VRF/bridge table, but not both. Whereas in the leaf or root site per AC scenario, a PE can receive traffic from both Root ACs and Leaf ACs for a given EVI. |
|
|
9 |
The following 2 topologies show the minimum topology we used in our test. |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
[[~[~[Figure 11: leaf or root site per PE scenario~>~>image:486469475688644609_MPLS-1.04_1.png~|~|alt="Figure 11" width="550"~]~]>>attach:486469475688644609_MPLS-1.04_1.png||target="_blank"]] |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
13 |
[[~[~[Figure 12: leaf or root site per AC scenario~>~>image:486469475688710145_MPLS-1.04_2.png~|~|alt="Figure 12" width="550"~]~]>>attach:486469475688710145_MPLS-1.04_2.png||target="_blank"]] |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
15 |
We tested both unicast and broadcast traffic and confirmed that root PE/AC isolates traffic between leaves but not from root to leaf. |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
17 |
{{container cssClass="tc-role-table"}} |
|
|
18 |
(% class="table-bordered" %) |
|
|
19 |
|=Leaf or root site per AC|=Leaf or root site per PE |
|
|
20 |
|Cisco 8711-48Z-M |
|
|
21 |
HPE MX304 |
|
|
22 |
Ribbon NPT-2507 |
|
|
23 |
Nokia 7750 SR-1|Ciena 5164 |
|
|
24 |
Ciena 8192 |
|
|
25 |
ZTE ZXCTN 6120H-E |
|
|
26 |
ZTE ZXCTN 6120H-S |
|
|
27 |
ZTE ZXR10 M6000-2S16 |
|
|
28 |
ZTE ZXR10 M6000-3S Plus |
|
|
29 |
ZTE ZXR10 M6000-4SE |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
31 |
{{/container}} |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
33 |
Table 1: E-Tree participants list |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
35 |
(% id="prev-next-links" %) |
|
|
36 |
|[[< Previous>>doc:E-Line service]]|[[Next ~>>>doc:Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast with PIM EVPN Gateway (PEG)]] |
|
|
37 |
))) |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
39 |
(% class="col-xs-12 col-sm-4 test-report-sidebar" %) |
|
|
40 |
((( |
|
|
41 |
{{box}} |
|
|
42 |
{{include reference="Main.EANTC Transport & Cloud Networks Interop Test Report 2026.Sidebar Nav"/}} |
|
|
43 |
{{/box}} |
|
|
44 |
))) |
|
|
45 |
))) |
