RFC9469: Applicability of Ethernet Virtual Private Network (EVPN) to Network Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) Networks

Download in text format

Related keywords:  (applicability) (EVPN) (nvo3)

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                   J. Rabadan, Ed.
Request for Comments: 9469                                      M. Bocci
Category: Informational                                            Nokia
ISSN: 2070-1721                                               S. Boutros
                                                              A. Sajassi
                                                          September 2023

  Applicability of Ethernet Virtual Private Network (EVPN) to Network
              Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) Networks


   An Ethernet Virtual Private Network (EVPN) provides a unified control
   plane that solves the issues of Network Virtualization Edge (NVE)
   auto-discovery, tenant Media Access Control (MAC) / IP dissemination,
   and advanced features in a scablable way as required by Network
   Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) networks.  EVPN is a scalable
   solution for NVO3 networks and keeps the independence of the underlay
   IP Fabric, i.e., there is no need to enable Protocol Independent
   Multicast (PIM) in the underlay network and maintain multicast states
   for tenant Broadcast Domains.  This document describes the use of
   EVPN for NVO3 networks and discusses its applicability to basic Layer
   2 and Layer 3 connectivity requirements and to advanced features such
   as MAC Mobility, MAC Protection and Loop Protection, multihoming,
   Data Center Interconnect (DCI), and much more.  No new EVPN
   procedures are introduced.

Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for informational purposes.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
   approved by the IESG are candidates for any level of Internet
   Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
   Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
   in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction
   2.  EVPN and NVO3 Terminology
   3.  Why is EVPN Needed in NVO3 Networks?
   4.  Applicability of EVPN to NVO3 Networks
     4.1.  EVPN Route Types Used in NVO3 Networks
     4.2.  EVPN Basic Applicability for Layer 2 Services
       4.2.1.  Auto-Discovery and Auto-Provisioning
       4.2.2.  Remote NVE Auto-Discovery
       4.2.3.  Distribution of Tenant MAC and IP Information
     4.3.  EVPN Basic Applicability for Layer 3 Services
     4.4.  EVPN as Control Plane for NVO3 Encapsulations and Geneve
     4.5.  EVPN OAM and Application to NVO3
     4.6.  EVPN as the Control Plane for NVO3 Security
     4.7.  Advanced EVPN Features for NVO3 Networks
       4.7.1.  Virtual Machine (VM) Mobility
       4.7.2.  MAC Protection, Duplication Detection, and Loop
       4.7.3.  Reduction/Optimization of BUM Traffic in Layer 2
       4.7.4.  Ingress Replication (IR) Optimization for BUM Traffic
       4.7.5.  EVPN Multihoming
       4.7.6.  EVPN Recursive Resolution for Inter-subnet Unicast
       4.7.7.  EVPN Optimized Inter-subnet Multicast Forwarding
       4.7.8.  Data Center Interconnect (DCI)
   5.  Security Considerations
   6.  IANA Considerations
   7.  References
     7.1.  Normative References
     7.2.  Informative References
   Authors' Addresses

1.  Introduction

   In Network Virtualization over Layer 3 (NVO3) networks, Network
   Virtualization Edge (NVE) devices sit at the edge of the underlay
   network and provide Layer 2 and Layer 3 connectivity among Tenant
   Systems (TSes) of the same tenant.  The NVEs need to build and
   maintain mapping tables so they can deliver encapsulated packets to
   their intended destination NVE(s).  While there are different options
   to create and disseminate the mapping table entries, NVEs may
   exchange that information directly among themselves via a control
   plane protocol, such as Ethernet Virtual Private Network (EVPN).
   EVPN provides an efficient, flexible, and unified control plane
   option that can be used for Layer 2 and Layer 3 Virtual Network (VN)
   service connectivity.  This document does not introduce any new
   procedures in EVPN.

   In this document, we assume that the EVPN control plane module
   resides in the NVEs.  The NVEs can be virtual switches in
   hypervisors, Top-of-Rack (ToR) switches or Leaf switches, or Data
   Center Gateways.  As described in [RFC7365], Network Virtualization
   Authorities (NVAs) may be used to provide the forwarding information
   to the NVEs, and in that case, EVPN could be used to disseminate the
   information across multiple federated NVAs.  The applicability of
   EVPN would then be similar to the one described in this document.
   However, for simplicity, the description assumes control plane
   communication among NVE(s).

2.  EVPN and NVO3 Terminology

   This document uses the terminology of [RFC7365] in addition to the
   terms that follow.

   AC:  Attachment Circuit or logical interface associated with a given
      BT.  To determine the AC on which a packet arrived, the NVE will
      examine the physical/logical port and/or VLAN tags (where the VLAN
      tags can be individual c-tags, s-tags, or ranges of both).

   ARP and NDP:  Address Resolution Protocol (IPv4) and Neighbor
      Discovery Protocol (IPv6), respectively.

   BD:  Broadcast Domain that corresponds to a tenant IP subnet.  If no
      suppression techniques are used, a BUM frame that is injected in a
      Broadcast Domain will reach all the NVEs that are attached to that
      Broadcast Domain.  An EVI may contain one or multiple Broadcast
      Domains depending on the service model [RFC7432].  This document
      will use the term Broadcast Domain to refer to a tenant subnet.

   BT:  Bridge Table, as defined in [RFC7432].  A BT is the
      instantiation of a Broadcast Domain in an NVE.  When there is a
      single Broadcast Domain on a given EVI, the MAC-VRF is equivalent
      to the BT on that NVE.  Although a Broadcast Domain spans multiple
      NVEs and a BT is really the instantiation of a Broadcast Domain in
      an NVE, this document uses BT and Broadcast Domain

   BUM:  Broadcast, Unknown Unicast, and Multicast frames

   Clos:  A multistage network topology described in [CLOS1953], where
      all the edge switches (or Leafs) are connected to all the core
      switches (or Spines).  Typically used in Data Centers.

   DF and NDF:  Designated Forwarder and Non-Designated Forwarder,
      respectively.  These are the roles that a given PE can have in a
      given ES.

   ECMP:  Equal-Cost Multipath

   ES:  Ethernet Segment.  When a Tenant System (TS) is connected to one
      or more NVEs via a set of Ethernet links, that set of links is
      referred to as an "Ethernet Segment".  Each ES is represented by a
      unique Ethernet Segment Identifier (ESI) in the NVO3 network, and
      the ESI is used in EVPN routes that are specific to that ES.

   Ethernet Tag:  Used to represent a Broadcast Domain that is
      configured on a given ES for the purpose of Designated Forwarder
      election.  Note that any of the following may be used to represent
      a Broadcast Domain: VIDs (including Q-in-Q tags), configured IDs,
      VNIs, normalized VIDs, Service Instance Identifiers (I-SIDs),
      etc., as long as the representation of the Broadcast Domains is
      configured consistently across the multihomed PEs attached to that

   EVI or EVPN Instance:  A Layer 2 Virtual Network that uses an EVPN
      control plane to exchange reachability information among the
      member NVEs.  It corresponds to a set of MAC-VRFs of the same
      tenant.  See MAC-VRF in this section.

   EVPN:  Ethernet Virtual Private Network, as described in [RFC7432].

   EVPN VLAN-Aware Bundle Service Interface:  Similar to the VLAN-bundle
      interface but each individual VLAN value is mapped to a different
      Broadcast Domain.  In this interface, there are multiple Broadcast
      Domains per EVI for a given tenant.  Each Broadcast Domain is
      identified by an "Ethernet Tag", which is a control plane value
      that identifies the routes for the Broadcast Domain within the

   EVPN VLAN-Based Service Interface:  One of the three service
      interfaces defined in [RFC7432].  It is characterized as a
      Broadcast Domain that uses a single VLAN per physical access port
      to attach tenant traffic to the Broadcast Domain.  In this service
      interface, there is only one Broadcast Domain per EVI.

   EVPN VLAN-Bundle Service Interface:  Similar to the VLAN-based
      interface but uses a bundle of VLANs per physical port to attach
      tenant traffic to the Broadcast Domain.  Like the VLAN-based
      interface, there is only one Broadcast Domain per EVI.

   Geneve:  Generic Network Virtualization Encapsulation.  An NVO3
      encapsulation defined in [RFC8926].

   IP-VRF:  IP Virtual Routing and Forwarding table, as defined in
      [RFC4364].  It stores IP Prefixes that are part of the tenant's IP
      space and are distributed among NVEs of the same tenant by EVPN.
      A Route Distinguisher (RD) and one or more Route Targets (RTs) are
      required properties of an IP-VRF.  An IP-VRF is instantiated in an
      NVE for a given tenant if the NVE is attached to multiple subnets
      of the tenant and local inter-subnet forwarding is required across
      those subnets.

   IRB:  Integrated Routing and Bridging.  It refers to the logical
      interface that connects a Broadcast Domain instance (or a BT) to
      an IP-VRF and forwards packets with a destination in a different

   MAC-VRF:  A MAC Virtual Routing and Forwarding table, as defined in
      [RFC7432].  The instantiation of an EVI (EVPN Instance) in an NVE.
      A Route Distinguisher (RD) and one or more RTs are required
      properties of a MAC-VRF, and they are normally different from the
      ones defined in the associated IP-VRF (if the MAC-VRF has an IRB

   NVE:  Network Virtualization Edge.  A network entity that sits at the
      edge of an underlay network and implements Layer 2 and/or Layer 3
      network virtualization functions.  The network-facing side of the
      NVE uses the underlying Layer 3 network to tunnel tenant frames to
      and from other NVEs.  The tenant-facing side of the NVE sends and
      receives Ethernet frames to and from individual Tenant Systems.
      In this document, an NVE could be implemented as a virtual switch
      within a hypervisor, a switch, or a router, and it runs EVPN in
      the control plane.

   NVO3 tunnels:  Network Virtualization over Layer 3 tunnels.  In this
      document, NVO3 tunnels refer to a way to encapsulate tenant frames
      or packets into IP packets, whose IP Source Addresses (SAs) or
      Destination Addresses (DAs) belong to the underlay IP address
      space, and identify NVEs connected to the same underlay network.
      Examples of NVO3 tunnel encapsulations are VXLAN [RFC7348], Geneve
      [RFC8926], or MPLSoUDP [RFC7510].

   PE:  Provider Edge

   PMSI:  Provider Multicast Service Interface

   PTA:  PMSI Tunnel Attribute

   RT and RD:  Route Target and Route Distinguisher, respectively.

   RT-1, RT-2, RT-3, etc.:  These refer to the Route Types followed by
      the type numbers as defined in the "EVPN Route Types" IANA
      registry (see <https://www.iana.org/assignments/evpn/>).

   SA and DA:  Source Address and Destination Address, respectively.
      They are used along with MAC or IP, e.g., IP SA or MAC DA.

   SBD:  Supplementary Broadcast Domain, as defined in [RFC9136].  It is
      a Broadcast Domain that does not have any Attachment Circuits,
      only has IRB interfaces, and provides connectivity among all the
      IP-VRFs of a tenant in the Interface-ful IP-VRF-to-IP-VRF models.

   TS:  Tenant System.  A physical or virtual system that can play the
      role of a host or a forwarding element, such as a router, switch,
      firewall, etc.  It belongs to a single tenant and connects to one
      or more Broadcast Domains of that tenant.

   VID:  Virtual Local Area Network Identifier

   VNI:  Virtual Network Identifier.  Irrespective of the NVO3
      encapsulation, the tunnel header always includes a VNI that is
      added at the ingress NVE (based on the mapping table lookup) and
      identifies the BT at the egress NVE.  This VNI is called VNI in
      VXLAN or Geneve, Virtual Subnet ID (VSID) in nvGRE, or Label in
      MPLSoGRE or MPLSoUDP.  This document refers to VNI as a generic
      VNI for any NVO3 encapsulation.

   VXLAN:  Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network.  An NVO3 encapsulation
      defined in [RFC7348].

3.  Why is EVPN Needed in NVO3 Networks?

   Data Centers have adopted NVO3 architectures mostly due to the issues
   discussed in [RFC7364].  The architecture of a Data Center is
   nowadays based on a Clos design, where every Leaf is connected to a
   layer of Spines and there is a number of ECMPs between any two Leaf
   nodes.  All the links between Leaf and Spine nodes are routed links,
   forming what we also know as an underlay IP Fabric.  The underlay IP
   Fabric does not have issues with loops or flooding (like old Spanning
   Tree Data Center designs did), convergence is fast, and ECMP
   generally distributes utilization well across all the links.

   On this architecture, and as discussed by [RFC7364], multi-tenant
   intra-subnet and inter-subnet connectivity services are provided by
   NVO3 tunnels.  VXLAN [RFC7348] and Geneve [RFC8926] are two examples
   of such NVO3 tunnels.

   Why is a control plane protocol along with NVO3 tunnels helpful?
   There are three main reasons:

   a.  Auto-discovery of the remote NVEs that are attached to the same
       VPN instance (Layer 2 and/or Layer 3) as the ingress NVE is.

   b.  Dissemination of the MAC/IP host information so that mapping
       tables can be populated on the remote NVEs.

   c.  Advanced features such as MAC Mobility, MAC Protection, BUM and
       ARP/ND traffic reduction/suppression, multihoming, functionality
       similar to Prefix Independent Convergence (PIC) [BGP-PIC], fast
       convergence, etc.

   "Flood and learn" is a possible approach to achieve points (a) and
   (b) above for multipoint Ethernet services.  "Flood and learn" refers
   to "flooding" BUM traffic from the ingress NVE to all the egress NVEs
   attached to the same Broadcast Domain instead of using a specific
   control plane on the NVEs.  The egress NVEs may then use data path
   source MAC address "learning" on the frames received over the NVO3
   tunnels.  When the destination host replies and the frames arrive at
   the NVE that initially flooded BUM frames, the NVE will also "learn"
   the source MAC address of the frame encapsulated on the NVO3 tunnel.
   This approach has the following drawbacks:

   *  In order to flood a given BUM frame, the ingress NVE must know the
      IP addresses of the remote NVEs attached to the same Broadcast
      Domain.  This may be done as follows:

      -  The remote tunnel IP addresses can be statically provisioned on
         the ingress NVE.  If the ingress NVE receives a BUM frame for
         the Broadcast Domain on an ingress Attachment Circuit, it will
         do ingress replication and will send the frame to all the
         configured egress NVE destination IP addresses in the Broadcast

      -  All the NVEs attached to the same Broadcast Domain can
         subscribe to an underlay IP multicast group that is dedicated
         to that Broadcast Domain.  When an ingress NVE receives a BUM
         frame on an ingress Attachment Circuit, it will send a single
         copy of the frame encapsulated into an NVO3 tunnel using the
         multicast address as the destination IP address of the tunnel.
         This solution requires PIM in the underlay network and the
         association of individual Broadcast Domains to underlay IP
         multicast groups.

   *  "Flood and learn" solves the issues of auto-discovery and the
      learning of the MAC to VNI/tunnel IP mapping on the NVEs for a
      given Broadcast Domain.  However, it does not provide a solution
      for advanced features, and it does not scale well (mostly due to
      the need for constant flooding and the underlay PIM states that
      must be maintained).

   EVPN provides a unified control plane that solves the issues of NVE
   auto-discovery, tenant MAC/IP dissemination, and advanced features in
   a scalable way and keeps the independence of the underlay IP Fabric;
   i.e., there is no need to enable PIM in the underlay network and
   maintain multicast states for tenant Broadcast Domains.

   Section 4 describes how EVPN can be used to meet the control plane
   requirements in an NVO3 network.

4.  Applicability of EVPN to NVO3 Networks

   This section discusses the applicability of EVPN to NVO3 networks.
   The intent is not to provide a comprehensive explanation of the
   protocol itself, but to give an introduction and point at the
   corresponding reference document so the reader can easily find more
   details if needed.

4.1.  EVPN Route Types Used in NVO3 Networks

   EVPN supports multiple Route Types, and each type has a different
   function.  For convenience, Table 1 shows a summary of all the
   existing EVPN Route Types and their usages.  In this document, we may
   refer to these route types as RT-x routes, where x is the type number
   included in the first column of Table 1.

     | Type | Description    | Usage                                 |
     | 1    | Ethernet Auto- | Multihoming: Used for MAC mass-       |
     |      | Discovery      | withdraw when advertised per Ethernet |
     |      |                | Segment and for aliasing/backup       |
     |      |                | functions when advertised per EVI.    |
     | 2    | MAC/IP         | Host MAC/IP dissemination; supports   |
     |      | Advertisement  | MAC Mobility and protection.          |
     | 3    | Inclusive      | NVE discovery and BUM flooding tree   |
     |      | Multicast      | setup.                                |
     |      | Ethernet Tag   |                                       |
     | 4    | Ethernet       | Multihoming: ES auto-discovery and DF |
     |      | Segment        | election.                             |
     | 5    | IP Prefix      | IP Prefix dissemination.              |
     | 6    | Selective      | Indicate interest for a multicast S,G |
     |      | Multicast      | or *,G.                               |
     |      | Ethernet Tag   |                                       |
     | 7    | Multicast Join | Multihoming: S,G or *,G state synch.  |
     |      | Synch          |                                       |
     | 8    | Multicast      | Multihoming: S,G or *,G leave synch.  |
     |      | Leave Synch    |                                       |
     | 9    | Per-Region     | BUM tree creation across regions.     |
     |      | I-PMSI A-D     |                                       |
     | 10   | S-PMSI A-D     | Multicast tree for S,G or *,G states. |
     | 11   | Leaf A-D       | Used for responses to explicit        |
     |      |                | tracking.                             |

                         Table 1: EVPN Route Types

4.2.  EVPN Basic Applicability for Layer 2 Services

   Although the applicability of EVPN to NVO3 networks spans multiple
   documents, EVPN's baseline specification is [RFC7432].  [RFC7432]
   allows multipoint Layer 2 VPNs to be operated as IP VPNs [RFC4364],
   where MACs and the information to set up flooding trees are
   distributed by Multiprotocol BGP (MP-BGP) [RFC4760].  Based on
   [RFC7432], [RFC8365] describes how to use EVPN to deliver Layer 2
   services specifically in NVO3 networks.

   Figure 1 represents a Layer 2 service deployed with an EVPN Broadcast
   Domain in an NVO3 network.

                                *        | Single-Active
                                *        |   ESI-1
                              +----+  +----+
                              |BD1 |  |BD1 |
                +-------------|    |--|    |-----------+
                |             +----+  +----+           |
                |              NVE2    NVE3          NVE4
                |           EVPN NVO3 Network       +----+
           NVE1(IP-A)                               | BD1|-----+
          +-------------+      RT-2                 |    |     |
          |             |    +-------+              +----+     |
          |   +----+    |    |MAC1   |               NVE5     TS3
   TS1--------|BD1 |    |    |IP1    |              +----+     |
   MAC1   |   +----+    |    |Label L|--->          | BD1|-----+
   IP1    |             |    |NH IP-A|              |    | All-Active
          | Hypervisor  |    +-------+              +----+  ESI-2
          +-------------+                              |

             Figure 1: EVPN for L2 in an NVO3 Network - Example

   In a simple NVO3 network, such as the example of Figure 1, these are
   the basic constructs that EVPN uses for Layer 2 services (or Layer 2
   Virtual Networks):

   *  BD1 is an EVPN Broadcast Domain for a given tenant and TS1, TS2,
      and TS3 are connected to it.  The five represented NVEs are
      attached to BD1 and are connected to the same underlay IP network.
      That is, each NVE learns the remote NVEs' loopback addresses via
      underlay routing protocol.

   *  NVE1 is deployed as a virtual switch in a hypervisor with IP-A as
      underlay loopback IP address.  The rest of the NVEs in Figure 1
      are physical switches and TS2/TS3 are multihomed to them.  TS1 is
      a virtual machine, identified by MAC1 and IP1.  TS2 and TS3 are
      physically dual-connected to NVEs; hence, they are normally not
      considered virtual machines.

   *  The terms Single-Active and All-Active in Figure 1 refer to the
      mode in which the TS2 and TS3 are multihomed to the NVEs in BD1.
      In All-Active mode, all the multihoming links are active and can
      send or receive traffic.  In Single-Active mode, only one link (of
      the set of links connected to the NVEs) is active.

4.2.1.  Auto-Discovery and Auto-Provisioning

   Auto-discovery is one of the basic capabilities of EVPN.  The
   provisioning of EVPN components in NVEs is significantly automated,
   simplifying the deployment of services and minimizing manual
   operations that are prone to human error.

   These are some of the auto-discovery and auto-provisioning
   capabilities available in EVPN:

   *  Automation on Ethernet Segments (ESes): An Ethernet Segment is
      defined as a group of NVEs that are attached to the same Tenant
      System or network.  An Ethernet Segment is identified by an
      Ethernet Segment Identifier (ESI) in the control plane, but
      neither the ESI nor the NVEs that share the same Ethernet Segment
      are required to be manually provisioned in the local NVE.

      -  If the multihomed Tenant System or network is running
         protocols, such as the Link Aggregation Control Protocol (LACP)
         [IEEE.802.1AX_2014], the Multiple Spanning Tree Protocol
         (MSTP), G.8032, etc., and all the NVEs in the Ethernet Segment
         can listen to the protocol PDUs to uniquely identify the
         multihomed Tenant System/network, then the ESI can be "auto-
         sensed" or "auto-provisioned" following the guidelines in
         Section 5 of [RFC7432].  The ESI can also be auto-derived out
         of other parameters that are common to all NVEs attached to the
         same Ethernet Segment.

      -  As described in [RFC7432], EVPN can also auto-derive the BGP
         parameters required to advertise the presence of a local
         Ethernet Segment in the control plane (RT and RD).  Local
         Ethernet Segments are advertised using Ethernet Segment routes,
         and the ESI-import Route Target used by Ethernet Segment routes
         can be auto-derived based on the procedures of Section 7.6 of

      -  By listening to other Ethernet Segment routes that match the
         local ESI and import Route Target, an NVE can also auto-
         discover the other NVEs participating in the multihoming for
         the Ethernet Segment.

      -  Once the NVE has auto-discovered all the NVEs attached to the
         same Ethernet Segment, the NVE can automatically perform the
         Designated Forwarder election algorithm (which determines the
         NVE that will forward traffic to the multihomed Tenant System/
         network).  EVPN guarantees that all the NVEs in the Ethernet
         Segment have a consistent Designated Forwarder election.

   *  Auto-provisioning of services: When deploying a Layer 2 service
      for a tenant in an NVO3 network, all the NVEs attached to the same
      subnet must be configured with a MAC-VRF and the Broadcast Domain
      for the subnet, as well as certain parameters for them.  Note that
      if the EVPN service interfaces are VLAN-based or VLAN-bundle,
      implementations do not normally have a specific provisioning for
      the Broadcast Domain since, in this case, it is the same construct
      as the MAC-VRF.  EVPN allows auto-deriving as many MAC-VRF
      parameters as possible.  As an example, the MAC-VRF's Route Target
      and Route Distinguisher for the EVPN routes may be auto-derived.
      Section of [RFC8365] specifies how to auto-derive a MAC-
      VRF's Route Target as long as a VLAN-based service interface is
      implemented.  [RFC7432] specifies how to auto-derive the Route

4.2.2.  Remote NVE Auto-Discovery

   Auto-discovery via MP-BGP [RFC4760] is used to discover the remote
   NVEs attached to a given Broadcast Domain, the NVEs participating in
   a given redundancy group, the tunnel encapsulation types supported by
   an NVE, etc.

   In particular, when a new MAC-VRF and Broadcast Domain are enabled,
   the NVE will advertise a new Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag route.
   Besides other fields, the Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag route will
   encode the IP address of the advertising NVE, the Ethernet Tag (which
   is zero in the case of VLAN-based and VLAN-bundle interfaces), and a
   PMSI Tunnel Attribute (PTA) that indicates the information about the
   intended way to deliver BUM traffic for the Broadcast Domain.

   When BD1 is enabled in the example of Figure 1, NVE1 will send an
   Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag route including its own IP address,
   an Ethernet-Tag for BD1, and the PMSI Tunnel Attribute to the remote
   NVEs.  Assuming Ingress Replication (IR) is used, the Inclusive
   Multicast Ethernet Tag route will include an identification for
   Ingress Replication in the PMSI Tunnel Attribute and the VNI that the
   other NVEs in the Broadcast Domain must use to send BUM traffic to
   the advertising NVE.  The other NVEs in the Broadcast Domain will
   import the Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag route and will add NVE1's
   IP address to the flooding list for BD1.  Note that the Inclusive
   Multicast Ethernet Tag route is also sent with a BGP encapsulation
   attribute [RFC9012] that indicates what NVO3 encapsulation the remote
   NVEs should use when sending BUM traffic to NVE1.

   Refer to [RFC7432] for more information about the Inclusive Multicast
   Ethernet Tag route and forwarding of BUM traffic.  See [RFC8365] for
   its considerations on NVO3 networks.

4.2.3.  Distribution of Tenant MAC and IP Information

   Tenant MAC/IP information is advertised to remote NVEs using MAC/IP
   Advertisement routes.  Following the example of Figure 1:

   *  In a given EVPN Broadcast Domain, the MAC addresses of TSes are
      first learned at the NVE they are attached to via data path or
      management plane learning.  In Figure 1, we assume NVE1 learns
      MAC1/IP1 in the management plane (for instance, via Cloud
      Management System) since the NVE is a virtual switch.  NVE2, NVE3,
      NVE4, and NVE5 are ToR/Leaf switches, and they normally learn MAC
      addresses via data path.

   *  Once NVE1's BD1 learns MAC1/IP1, NVE1 advertises that information
      along with a VNI and Next-Hop IP-A in a MAC/IP Advertisement
      route.  The EVPN routes are advertised using the Route
      Distinguisher / Route Targets of the MAC-VRF where the Broadcast
      Domain belongs.  Similarly, all the NVEs in BD1 learn local MAC/IP
      addresses and advertise them in MAC/IP Advertisement routes.

   *  The remote NVEs can then add MAC1 to their mapping table for BD1
      (BT).  For instance, when TS3 sends frames to NVE4 with the
      destination MAC address = MAC1, NVE4 does a MAC lookup on the
      Bridge Table that yields IP-A and Label L.  NVE4 can then
      encapsulate the frame into an NVO3 tunnel with IP-A as the tunnel
      destination IP address and L as the VNI.  Note that the MAC/IP
      Advertisement route may also contain the host's IP address (as
      shown in the example of Figure 1).  While the MAC of the received
      MAC/IP Advertisement route is installed in the Bridge Table, the
      IP address may be installed in the Proxy ARP/ND table (if enabled)
      or in the ARP/IP-VRF tables if the Broadcast Domain has an IRB.
      See Section 4.7.3 for more information about Proxy ARP/ND and
      Section 4.3 for more details about IRB and Layer 3 services.

   Refer to [RFC7432] and [RFC8365] for more information about the MAC/
   IP Advertisement route and the forwarding of known unicast traffic.

4.3.  EVPN Basic Applicability for Layer 3 Services

   [RFC9136] and [RFC9135] are the reference documents that describe how
   EVPN can be used for Layer 3 services.  Inter-subnet forwarding in
   EVPN networks is implemented via IRB interfaces between Broadcast
   Domains and IP-VRFs.  An EVPN Broadcast Domain corresponds to an IP
   subnet.  When IP packets generated in a Broadcast Domain are destined
   to a different subnet (different Broadcast Domain) of the same
   tenant, the packets are sent to the IRB attached to the local
   Broadcast Domain in the source NVE.  As discussed in [RFC9135],
   depending on how the IP packets are forwarded between the ingress NVE
   and the egress NVE, there are two forwarding models: Asymmetric and

   The Asymmetric model is illustrated in the example of Figure 2, and
   it requires the configuration of all the Broadcast Domains of the
   tenant in all the NVEs attached to the same tenant.  That way, there
   is no need to advertise IP Prefixes between NVEs since all the NVEs
   are attached to all the subnets.  It is called "Asymmetric" because
   the ingress and egress NVEs do not perform the same number of lookups
   in the data plane.  In Figure 2, if TS1 and TS2 are in different
   subnets and TS1 sends IP packets to TS2, the following lookups are
   required in the data path: a MAC lookup at BD1's table, an IP lookup
   at the IP-VRF, a MAC lookup at BD2's table at the ingress NVE1, and
   only a MAC lookup at the egress NVE.  The two IP-VRFs in Figure 2 are
   not connected by tunnels, and all the connectivity between the NVEs
   is done based on tunnels between the Broadcast Domains.

                 |             EVPN NVO3               |
                 |                                     |
               NVE1                                 NVE2
         +--------------------+            +--------------------+
         | +---+IRB +------+  |            |  +------+IRB +---+ |
   TS1-----|BD1|----|IP-VRF|  |            |  |IP-VRF|----|BD1| |
         | +---+    |      |  |            |  |      |    +---+ |
         | +---+    |      |  |            |  |      |    +---+ |
         | |BD2|----|      |  |            |  |      |----|BD2|----TS2
         | +---+IRB +------+  |            |  +------+IRB +---+ |
         +--------------------+            +--------------------+
                 |                                     |

        Figure 2: EVPN for L3 in an NVO3 Network - Asymmetric Model

   In the Symmetric model, depicted in Figure 3, the same number of data
   path lookups is needed at the ingress and egress NVEs.  For example,
   if TS1 sends IP packets to TS3, the following data path lookups are
   required: a MAC lookup at NVE1's BD1 table, an IP lookup at NVE1's
   IP-VRF, and an IP lookup and MAC lookup at NVE2's IP-VRF and BD3,
   respectively.  In the Symmetric model, the inter-subnet connectivity
   between NVEs is done based on tunnels between the IP-VRFs.

                 |             EVPN NVO3               |
                 |                                     |
               NVE1                                 NVE2
         +--------------------+            +--------------------+
         | +---+IRB +------+  |            |  +------+IRB +---+ |
   TS1-----|BD1|----|IP-VRF|  |            |  |IP-VRF|----|BD3|-----TS3
         | +---+    |      |  |            |  |      |    +---+ |
         | +---+IRB |      |  |            |  +------+          |
   TS2-----|BD2|----|      |  |            +--------------------+
         | +---+    +------+  |                        |
         +--------------------+                        |
                 |                                     |

         Figure 3: EVPN for L3 in an NVO3 Network - Symmetric Model

   The Symmetric model scales better than the Asymmetric model because
   it does not require the NVEs to be attached to all the tenant's
   subnets.  However, it requires the use of NVO3 tunnels on the IP-VRFs
   and the exchange of IP Prefixes between the NVEs in the control
   plane.  EVPN uses MAC/IP Advertisement routes for the exchange of
   host IP routes and IP Prefix routes for the exchange of prefixes of
   any length, including host routes.  As an example, in Figure 3, NVE2
   needs to advertise TS3's host route and/or TS3's subnet so that the
   IP lookup on NVE1's IP-VRF succeeds.

   [RFC9135] specifies the use of MAC/IP Advertisement routes for the
   advertisement of host routes.  Section 4.4.1 of [RFC9136] specifies
   the use of IP Prefix routes for the advertisement of IP Prefixes in
   an "Interface-less IP-VRF-to-IP-VRF Model".  The Symmetric model for
   host routes can be implemented following either approach:

   a.  [RFC9135] uses MAC/IP Advertisement routes to convey the
       information to populate Layer 2, ARP/ND, and Layer 3 Forwarding
       Information Base tables in the remote NVE.  For instance, in
       Figure 3, NVE2 would advertise a MAC/IP Advertisement route with
       TS3's IP and MAC addresses and include two labels / VNIs: a
       label-3/VNI-3 that identifies BD3 for MAC lookup (that would be
       used for Layer 2 traffic in case NVE1 was attached to BD3 too)
       and a label-1/VNI-1 that identifies the IP-VRF for IP lookup
       (that would be used for Layer 3 traffic).  NVE1 imports the MAC/
       IP Advertisement route and installs TS3's IP in the IP-VRF route
       table with label-1/VNI-1.  Traffic, e.g., from TS2 to TS3, would
       be encapsulated with label-1/VNI-1 and forwarded to NVE2.

   b.  [RFC9136] uses MAC/IP Advertisement routes to convey the
       information to populate the Layer 2 Forwarding Information Base,
       ARP/ND tables, and IP Prefix routes to populate the IP-VRF Layer
       3 Forwarding Information Base table.  For instance, in Figure 3,
       NVE2 would advertise a MAC/IP Advertisement route including TS3's
       MAC and IP addresses with a single label-3/VNI-3.  In this
       example, this MAC/IP Advertisement route wouldn't be imported by
       NVE1 because NVE1 is not attached to BD3.  In addition, NVE2
       would advertise an IP Prefix route with TS3's IP address and
       label-1/VNI-1.  This IP Prefix route would be imported by NVE1's
       IP-VRF and the host route installed in the Layer 3 Forwarding
       Information Base associated with label-1/VNI-1.  Traffic from TS2
       to TS3 would be encapsulated with label-1/VNI-1.

4.4.  EVPN as Control Plane for NVO3 Encapsulations and Geneve

   [RFC8365] describes how to use EVPN for NVO3 encapsulations, such us
   VXLAN, nvGRE, or MPLSoGRE.  The procedures can be easily applicable
   to any other NVO3 encapsulation, particularly Geneve.

   Geneve [RFC8926] is the proposed standard encapsulation specified in
   the IETF Network Virtualization Overlays Working Group.  The EVPN
   control plane can signal the Geneve encapsulation type in the BGP
   Tunnel Encapsulation Extended Community (see [RFC9012]).

   Geneve requires a control plane [NVO3-ENCAP] to:

   *  Negotiate a subset of Geneve option TLVs that can be carried on a
      Geneve tunnel,

   *  Enforce an order for Geneve option TLVs, and

   *  Limit the total number of options that could be carried on a
      Geneve tunnel.

   The EVPN control plane can easily extend the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation
   attribute sub-TLV [RFC9012] to specify the Geneve tunnel options that
   can be received or transmitted over a Geneve tunnel by a given NVE.
   [EVPN-GENEVE] describes the EVPN control plane extensions to support

4.5.  EVPN OAM and Application to NVO3

   EVPN Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM), as described
   in [EVPN-LSP-PING], defines mechanisms to detect data plane failures
   in an EVPN deployment over an MPLS network.  These mechanisms detect
   failures related to point-to-point (P2P) and Point-to-Multipoint
   (P2MP) connectivity, for multi-tenant unicast and multicast Layer 2
   traffic, between multi-tenant access nodes connected to EVPN PE(s),
   and in a single-homed, Single-Active, or All-Active redundancy model.

   In general, EVPN OAM mechanisms defined for EVPN deployed in MPLS
   networks are equally applicable for EVPN in NVO3 networks.

4.6.  EVPN as the Control Plane for NVO3 Security

   EVPN can be used to signal the security protection capabilities of a
   sender NVE, as well as what portion of an NVO3 packet (taking a
   Geneve packet as an example) can be protected by the sender NVE, to
   ensure the privacy and integrity of tenant traffic carried over the
   NVO3 tunnels [SECURE-EVPN].

4.7.  Advanced EVPN Features for NVO3 Networks

   This section describes how EVPN can be used to deliver advanced
   capabilities in NVO3 networks.

4.7.1.  Virtual Machine (VM) Mobility

   [RFC7432] replaces the classic Ethernet "flood and learn" behavior
   among NVEs with BGP-based MAC learning.  In return, this provides
   more control over the location of MAC addresses in the Broadcast
   Domain and consequently advanced features, such as MAC Mobility.  If
   we assume that Virtual Machine (VM) Mobility means the VM's MAC and
   IP addresses move with the VM, EVPN's MAC Mobility is the required
   procedure that facilitates VM Mobility.  According to Section 15 of
   [RFC7432], when a MAC is advertised for the first time in a Broadcast
   Domain, all the NVEs attached to the Broadcast Domain will store
   Sequence Number zero for that MAC.  When the MAC "moves" to a remote
   NVE within the same Broadcast Domain, the NVE that just learned the
   MAC locally increases the Sequence Number in the MAC/IP Advertisement
   route's MAC Mobility extended community to indicate that it owns the
   MAC now.  That makes all the NVEs in the Broadcast Domain change
   their tables immediately with no need to wait for any aging timer.
   EVPN guarantees a fast MAC Mobility without flooding or packet drops
   in the Broadcast Domain.

4.7.2.  MAC Protection, Duplication Detection, and Loop Protection

   The advertisement of MACs in the control plane allows advanced
   features such as MAC Protection, Duplication Detection, and Loop

   In a MAC/IP Advertisement route, MAC Protection refers to EVPN's
   ability to indicate that a MAC must be protected by the NVE receiving
   the route [RFC7432].  The Protection is indicated in the "Sticky bit"
   of the MAC Mobility extended community sent along the MAC/IP
   Advertisement route for a MAC.  NVEs' Attachment Circuits that are
   connected to subject-to-be-protected servers or VMs may set the
   Sticky bit on the MAC/IP Advertisement routes sent for the MACs
   associated with the Attachment Circuits.  Also, statically configured
   MAC addresses should be advertised as Protected MAC addresses since
   they are not subject to MAC Mobility procedures.

   MAC Duplication Detection refers to EVPN's ability to detect
   duplicate MAC addresses [RFC7432].  A "MAC move" is a relearn event
   that happens at an access Attachment Circuit or through a MAC/IP
   Advertisement route with a Sequence Number that is higher than the
   stored one for the MAC.  When a MAC moves a number of times (N)
   within an M-second window between two NVEs, the MAC is declared as a
   duplicate and the detecting NVE does not re-advertise the MAC

   [RFC7432] provides MAC Duplication Detection, and with an extension,
   it can protect the Broadcast Domain against loops created by backdoor
   links between NVEs.  The same principle (based on the Sequence
   Number) may be extended to protect the Broadcast Domain against
   loops.  When a MAC is detected as a duplicate, the NVE may install it
   as a drop-MAC and discard received frames with source MAC address or
   the destination MAC address matching that duplicate MAC.  The MAC
   Duplication extension to support Loop Protection is described in
   Section 15.3 of [RFC7432BIS].

4.7.3.  Reduction/Optimization of BUM Traffic in Layer 2 Services

   In Broadcast Domains with a significant amount of flooding due to
   Unknown Unicast and broadcast frames, EVPN may help reduce and
   sometimes even suppress the flooding.

   In Broadcast Domains where most of the broadcast traffic is caused by
   the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) and the Neighbor Discovery
   Protocol (NDP) on the Tenant Systems, EVPN's Proxy ARP and Proxy ND
   capabilities may reduce the flooding drastically.  The use of Proxy
   ARP/ND is specified in [RFC9161].

   Proxy ARP/ND procedures, along with the assumption that Tenant
   Systems always issue a Gratuitous ARP (GARP) or an unsolicited
   Neighbor Advertisement message when they come up in the Broadcast
   Domain, may drastically reduce the Unknown Unicast flooding in the
   Broadcast Domain.

   The flooding caused by Tenant Systems' IGMP / Multicast Listener
   Discovery (MLD) or PIM messages in the Broadcast Domain may also be
   suppressed by the use of IGMP/MLD and PIM Proxy functions, as
   specified in [RFC9251] and [EVPN-PIM-PROXY].  These two documents
   also specify how to forward IP multicast traffic efficiently within
   the same Broadcast Domain, translate soft state IGMP/MLD/PIM messages
   into hard state BGP routes, and provide fast convergence redundancy
   for IP multicast on multihomed ESes.

4.7.4.  Ingress Replication (IR) Optimization for BUM Traffic

   When an NVE attached to a given Broadcast Domain needs to send BUM
   traffic for the Broadcast Domain to the remote NVEs attached to the
   same Broadcast Domain, Ingress Replication is a very common option in
   NVO3 networks since it is completely independent of the multicast
   capabilities of the underlay network.  Also, if the optimization
   procedures to reduce/suppress the flooding in the Broadcast Domain
   are enabled (Section 4.7.3) in spite of creating multiple copies of
   the same frame at the ingress NVE, Ingress Replication may be good
   enough.  However, in Broadcast Domains where Multicast (or Broadcast)
   traffic is significant, Ingress Replication may be very inefficient
   and cause performance issues on virtual switch-based NVEs.

   [EVPN-OPT-IR] specifies the use of Assisted Replication (AR) NVO3
   tunnels in EVPN Broadcast Domains.  AR retains the independence of
   the underlay network while providing a way to forward Broadcast and
   multicast traffic efficiently.  AR uses AR-REPLICATORs that can
   replicate the broadcast/multicast traffic on behalf of the AR-LEAF
   NVEs.  The AR-LEAF NVEs are typically virtual switches or NVEs with
   limited replication capabilities.  AR can work in a single-stage
   replication mode (Non-Selective Mode) or in a dual-stage replication
   mode (Selective Mode).  Both modes are detailed in [EVPN-OPT-IR].

   In addition, [EVPN-OPT-IR] describes a procedure to avoid sending BUM
   to certain NVEs that do not need that type of traffic.  This is done
   by enabling Pruned Flood Lists (PFLs) on a given Broadcast Domain.
   For instance, a virtual switch NVE that learns all its local MAC
   addresses for a Broadcast Domain via a Cloud Management System does
   not need to receive the Broadcast Domain's Unknown Unicast traffic.
   PFLs help optimize the BUM flooding in the Broadcast Domain.

4.7.5.  EVPN Multihoming

   Another fundamental concept in EVPN is multihoming.  A given Tenant
   System can be multihomed to two or more NVEs for a given Broadcast
   Domain, and the set of links connected to the same Tenant System is
   defined as an ES.  EVPN supports Single-Active and All-Active
   multihoming.  In Single-Active multihoming, only one link in the
   Ethernet Segment is active.  In All-Active multihoming, all the links
   in the Ethernet Segment are active for unicast traffic.  Both modes
   support load-balancing:

   *  Single-Active multihoming means per-service load-balancing to/from
      the Tenant System.  For example, in Figure 1 for BD1, only one of
      the NVEs can forward traffic from/to TS2.  For a different
      Broadcast Domain, the other NVE may forward traffic.

   *  All-active multihoming means per-flow load-balancing for unicast
      frames to/from the Tenant System.  That is, in Figure 1 and for
      BD1, both NVE4 and NVE5 can forward known unicast traffic to/from
      TS3.  For BUM traffic, only one of the two NVEs can forward
      traffic to TS3, and both can forward traffic from TS3.

   There are two key aspects in the EVPN multihoming procedures:

   Designated Forwarder (DF) election:
      The Designated Forwarder is the NVE that forwards the traffic to
      the Ethernet Segment in Single-Active mode.  In the case of All-
      Active mode, the Designated Forwarder is the NVE that forwards the
      BUM traffic to the Ethernet Segment.

   Split-horizon function:
      Prevents the Tenant System from receiving echoed BUM frames that
      the Tenant System itself sent to the Ethernet Segment.  This is
      especially relevant in All-Active ESes where the TS may forward
      BUM frames to a Non-Designated Forwarder NVE that can flood the
      BUM frames back to the Designated Forwarder NVE and then back to
      the TS.  As an example, assuming NVE4 is the Designated Forwarder
      for ESI-2 in BD1, Figure 1 shows that BUM frames sent from TS3 to
      NVE5 will be received at NVE4.  NVE4 will forward them back to TS3
      since NVE4 is the Designated Forwarder for BD1.  Split-horizon
      allows NVE4 (and any multihomed NVE for that matter) to identify
      if an EVPN BUM frame is coming from the same Ethernet Segment or a
      different one.  If the frame belongs to the same ESI-2, NVE4 will
      not forward the BUM frame to TS3 in spite of being the Designated

   While [RFC7432] describes the default algorithm for the Designated
   Forwarder election, [RFC8584] and [EVPN-PREF-DF] specify other
   algorithms and procedures that optimize the Designated Forwarder

   The split-horizon function is specified in [RFC7432], and it is
   carried out by using a special ESI-label that it identifies in the
   data path with all the BUM frames originating from a given NVE and
   Ethernet Segment.  Since the ESI-label is an MPLS label, it cannot be
   used in all the non-MPLS NVO3 encapsulations.  Therefore, [RFC8365]
   defines a modified split-horizon procedure that is based on the
   source IP address of the NVO3 tunnel; it is known as "Local-Bias".
   It is worth noting that Local-Bias only works for All-Active
   multihoming, and not for Single-Active multihoming.

4.7.6.  EVPN Recursive Resolution for Inter-subnet Unicast Forwarding

   Section 4.3 describes how EVPN can be used for inter-subnet
   forwarding among subnets of the same tenant.  MAC/IP Advertisement
   routes and IP Prefix routes allow the advertisement of host routes
   and IP Prefixes (IP Prefix route) of any length.  The procedures
   outlined by Section 4.3 are similar to the ones in [RFC4364], but
   they are only for NVO3 tunnels.  However, [RFC9136] also defines
   advanced inter-subnet forwarding procedures that allow the resolution
   of IP Prefix routes not only to BGP next hops but also to "overlay
   indexes" that can be a MAC, a Gateway IP (GW-IP), or an ESI, all of
   them in the tenant space.

   Figure 4 illustrates an example that uses Recursive Resolution to a
   GW-IP as per Section 4.4.2 of [RFC9136].  In this example, IP-VRFs in
   NVE1 and NVE2 are connected by a Supplementary Broadcast Domain
   (SBD).  An SBD is a Broadcast Domain that connects all the IP-VRFs of
   the same tenant via IRB and has no Attachment Circuits.  NVE1
   advertises the host route TS2-IP/L (IP address and Prefix Length of
   TS2) in an IP Prefix route with overlay index GW-IP=IP1.  Also, IP1
   is advertised in a MAC/IP Advertisement route associated with M1,
   VNI-S, and BGP next-hop NVE1.  Upon importing the two routes, NVE2
   installs TS2-IP/L in the IP-VRF with a next hop that is the GW-IP
   IP1.  NVE2 also installs M1 in the Supplementary Broadcast Domain,
   with VNI-S and NVE1 as next hop.  If TS3 sends a packet with IP
   DA=TS2, NVE2 will perform a Recursive Resolution of the IP Prefix
   route prefix information to the forwarding information of the
   correlated MAC/IP Advertisement route.  The IP Prefix route's
   Recursive Resolution has several advantages, such as better
   convergence in scaled networks (since multiple IP Prefix routes can
   be invalidated with a single withdrawal of the overlay index route)
   or the ability to advertise multiple IP Prefix routes from an overlay
   index that can move or change dynamically.  [RFC9136] describes a few
   use cases.

                 |             EVPN NVO3               |
                 |                                     +
               NVE1                                 NVE2
         +--------------------+            +--------------------+
         | +---+IRB +------+  |            |  +------+IRB +---+ |
   TS1-----|BD1|----|IP-VRF|  |            |  |IP-VRF|----|BD3|-----TS3
         | +---+    |      |-(SBD)------(SBD)-|      |    +---+ |
         | +---+IRB |      |IRB(IP1/M1)    IRB+------+          |
   TS2-----|BD2|----|      |  |            +-----------+--------+
         | +---+    +------+  |                        |
         +--------------------+                        |
                 |   RT-2(M1,IP1,VNI-S,NVE1)-->        |
                 |     RT-5(TS2-IP/L,GW-IP=IP1)-->     |

            Figure 4: EVPN for L3 - Recursive Resolution Example

4.7.7.  EVPN Optimized Inter-subnet Multicast Forwarding

   The concept of the Supplementary Broadcast Domain described in
   Section 4.7.6 is also used in [EVPN-IRB-MCAST] for the procedures
   related to inter-subnet multicast forwarding across Broadcast Domains
   of the same tenant.  For instance, [EVPN-IRB-MCAST] allows the
   efficient forwarding of IP multicast traffic from any Broadcast
   Domain to any other Broadcast Domain (or even to the same Broadcast
   Domain where the source resides).  The [EVPN-IRB-MCAST] procedures
   are supported along with EVPN multihoming and for any tree allowed on
   NVO3 networks, including IR or AR.  [EVPN-IRB-MCAST] also describes
   the interoperability between EVPN and other multicast technologies
   such as Multicast VPN (MVPN) and PIM for inter-subnet multicast.

   [EVPN-MVPN-SEAMLESS] describes another potential solution to support
   EVPN to MVPN interoperability.

4.7.8.  Data Center Interconnect (DCI)

   Tenant Layer 2 and Layer 3 services deployed on NVO3 networks must
   often be extended to remote NVO3 networks that are connected via non-
   NOV3 Wide Area Networks (WANs) (mostly MPLS-based WANs).  [RFC9014]
   defines some architectural models that can be used to interconnect
   NVO3 networks via MPLS WANs.

   When NVO3 networks are connected by MPLS WANs, [RFC9014] specifies
   how EVPN can be used end to end in spite of using a different
   encapsulation in the WAN.  [RFC9014] also supports the use of NVO3 or
   Segment Routing (encoding 32-bit or 128-bit Segment Identifiers into
   labels or IPv6 addresses, respectively) transport tunnels in the WAN.

   Even if EVPN can also be used in the WAN for Layer 2 and Layer 3
   services, there may be a need to provide a Gateway function between
   EVPN for NVO3 encapsulations and IP VPN for MPLS tunnels if the
   operator uses IP VPN in the WAN.  [EVPN-IPVPN-INTERWORK] specifies
   the interworking function between EVPN and IP VPN for unicast inter-
   subnet forwarding.  If inter-subnet multicast forwarding is also
   needed across an IP VPN WAN, [EVPN-IRB-MCAST] describes the required
   interworking between EVPN and MVPNs.

5.  Security Considerations

   This document does not introduce any new procedure or additional
   signaling in EVPN and relies on the security considerations of the
   individual specifications used as a reference throughout the
   document.  In particular, and as mentioned in [RFC7432], control
   plane and forwarding path protection are aspects to secure in any
   EVPN domain when applied to NVO3 networks.

   [RFC7432] mentions security techniques such as those discussed in
   [RFC5925] to authenticate BGP messages, and those included in
   [RFC4271], [RFC4272], and [RFC6952] to secure BGP are relevant for
   EVPN in NVO3 networks as well.

6.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA actions.

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC7364]  Narten, T., Ed., Gray, E., Ed., Black, D., Fang, L.,
              Kreeger, L., and M. Napierala, "Problem Statement:
              Overlays for Network Virtualization", RFC 7364,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7364, October 2014,

   [RFC7365]  Lasserre, M., Balus, F., Morin, T., Bitar, N., and Y.
              Rekhter, "Framework for Data Center (DC) Network
              Virtualization", RFC 7365, DOI 10.17487/RFC7365, October
              2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7365>.

   [RFC7432]  Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A.,
              Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS-Based
              Ethernet VPN", RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432, February
              2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7432>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [BGP-PIC]  Bashandy, A., Ed., Filsfils, C., and P. Mohapatra, "BGP
              Prefix Independent Convergence", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rtgwg-bgp-pic-19, 1 April 2023,

   [CLOS1953] Clos, C., "A study of non-blocking switching networks",
              The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 32, Issue 2,
              DOI 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1953.tb01433.x, March 1953,

              Boutros, S., Ed., Sajassi, A., Drake, J., Rabadan, J., and
              S. Aldrin, "EVPN control plane for Geneve", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bess-evpn-geneve-06,
              26 May 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-

              Rabadan, J., Ed., Sajassi, A., Ed., Rosen, E., Drake, J.,
              Lin, W., Uttaro, J., and A. Simpson, "EVPN Interworking
              with IPVPN", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
              bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-08, 5 July 2023,

              Lin, W., Zhang, Z., Drake, J., Rosen, E., Ed., Rabadan,
              J., and A. Sajassi, "EVPN Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast
              (OISM) Forwarding", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast-09, 21 February 2023,

              Jain, P., Sajassi, A., Salam, S., Boutros, S., and G.
              Mirsky, "LSP-Ping Mechanisms for EVPN and PBB-EVPN", Work
              in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-
              ping-11, 29 May 2023,

              Sajassi, A., Thiruvenkatasamy, K., Thoria, S., Gupta, A.,
              and L. Jalil, "Seamless Multicast Interoperability between
              EVPN and MVPN PEs", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mvpn-seamless-interop-05, 13 March
              2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-

              Rabadan, J., Ed., Sathappan, S., Lin, W., Katiyar, M., and
              A. Sajassi, "Optimized Ingress Replication Solution for
              Ethernet VPN (EVPN)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-12, 25 January 2022,

              Rabadan, J., Ed., Kotalwar, J., Sathappan, S., Zhang, Z.,
              and A. Sajassi, "PIM Proxy in EVPN Networks", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-skr-bess-evpn-pim-proxy-
              01, 30 October 2017,

              Rabadan, J., Ed., Sathappan, S., Lin, W., Drake, J., and
              A. Sajassi, "Preference-based EVPN DF Election", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df-11,
              6 July 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-

              IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
              networks -- Link Aggregation", IEEE Std 802.1AX-2014,
              DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2014.7055197, December 2014,

              Boutros, S., Ed. and D. Eastlake 3rd, Ed., "Network
              Virtualization Overlays (NVO3) Encapsulation
              Considerations", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              ietf-nvo3-encap-09, 7 October 2022,

   [RFC4271]  Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
              Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,

   [RFC4272]  Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis",
              RFC 4272, DOI 10.17487/RFC4272, January 2006,

   [RFC4364]  Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
              Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
              2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.

   [RFC4760]  Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D., and Y. Rekhter,
              "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4760, January 2007,

   [RFC5925]  Touch, J., Mankin, A., and R. Bonica, "The TCP
              Authentication Option", RFC 5925, DOI 10.17487/RFC5925,
              June 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5925>.

   [RFC6952]  Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of
              BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying
              and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design
              Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013,

   [RFC7348]  Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., Duda, K., Agarwal, P., Kreeger,
              L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright, "Virtual
              eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for
              Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over Layer 3
              Networks", RFC 7348, DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014,

              Sajassi, A., Burdet, L., Drake, J., and J. Rabadan, "BGP
              MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN", Work in Progress, Internet-
              Draft, draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis-07, 13 March 2023,

   [RFC7510]  Xu, X., Sheth, N., Yong, L., Callon, R., and D. Black,
              "Encapsulating MPLS in UDP", RFC 7510,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7510, April 2015,

   [RFC8365]  Sajassi, A., Ed., Drake, J., Ed., Bitar, N., Shekhar, R.,
              Uttaro, J., and W. Henderickx, "A Network Virtualization
              Overlay Solution Using Ethernet VPN (EVPN)", RFC 8365,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8365, March 2018,

   [RFC8584]  Rabadan, J., Ed., Mohanty, S., Ed., Sajassi, A., Drake,
              J., Nagaraj, K., and S. Sathappan, "Framework for Ethernet
              VPN Designated Forwarder Election Extensibility",
              RFC 8584, DOI 10.17487/RFC8584, April 2019,

   [RFC8926]  Gross, J., Ed., Ganga, I., Ed., and T. Sridhar, Ed.,
              "Geneve: Generic Network Virtualization Encapsulation",
              RFC 8926, DOI 10.17487/RFC8926, November 2020,

   [RFC9012]  Patel, K., Van de Velde, G., Sangli, S., and J. Scudder,
              "The BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute", RFC 9012,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9012, April 2021,

   [RFC9014]  Rabadan, J., Ed., Sathappan, S., Henderickx, W., Sajassi,
              A., and J. Drake, "Interconnect Solution for Ethernet VPN
              (EVPN) Overlay Networks", RFC 9014, DOI 10.17487/RFC9014,
              May 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9014>.

   [RFC9135]  Sajassi, A., Salam, S., Thoria, S., Drake, J., and J.
              Rabadan, "Integrated Routing and Bridging in Ethernet VPN
              (EVPN)", RFC 9135, DOI 10.17487/RFC9135, October 2021,

   [RFC9136]  Rabadan, J., Ed., Henderickx, W., Drake, J., Lin, W., and
              A. Sajassi, "IP Prefix Advertisement in Ethernet VPN
              (EVPN)", RFC 9136, DOI 10.17487/RFC9136, October 2021,

   [RFC9161]  Rabadan, J., Ed., Sathappan, S., Nagaraj, K., Hankins, G.,
              and T. King, "Operational Aspects of Proxy ARP/ND in
              Ethernet Virtual Private Networks", RFC 9161,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9161, January 2022,

   [RFC9251]  Sajassi, A., Thoria, S., Mishra, M., Patel, K., Drake, J.,
              and W. Lin, "Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) and
              Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) Proxies for Ethernet
              VPN (EVPN)", RFC 9251, DOI 10.17487/RFC9251, June 2022,

              Sajassi, A., Banerjee, A., Thoria, S., Carrel, D., Weis,
              B., and J. Drake, "Secure EVPN", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bess-secure-evpn-00, 20 June
              2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-


   The authors thank Aldrin Isaac for his comments.

Authors' Addresses

   Jorge Rabadan (editor)
   520 Almanor Ave
   Sunnyvale, CA 94085
   United States of America
   Email: jorge.rabadan@nokia.com

   Matthew Bocci
   Email: matthew.bocci@nokia.com

   Sami Boutros
   Email: sboutros@ciena.com

   Ali Sajassi
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   Email: sajassi@cisco.com