]> Cisco Systems

170 W Tasman Drive San Jose CA USA rajshr@cisco.com

Cisco Systems

170 W Tasman Drive San Jose CA USA ayabaner@cisco.com

Cisco Systems

170 W Tasman Drive San Jose CA USA raghavas@cisco.com

Cisco Systems

170 W Tasman Drive San Jose CA USA sajassi@cisco.com

General Internet Engineering Task Force evpn This document described the procedures for interconnecting two or more Network Virtualization Overlays (NVOs) via NVO over IP-only network. The solution interconnects Ethernet VPN network by using NVO with Ethernet VPN (EVPN) to facilitate the interconnect in a scalable fashion. The motivation is to support extension of Layer-2 and Layer-3, Unicast and Multicast, VPNs without having to rely on typical Data Center Interconnect (DCI) technologies like MPLS/VPLS. The requirements for the interconnect are similar to the ones specified in RFC7209 "Requirements for Ethernet VPN (EVPN)". In particular, this document describes the difference of the Gateways (GWs) procedure and incremental functionality from [RFC9014] "Interconnect Solution for Ethernet VPN (EVPN) Overlay Networks", which this solution is interoperable with. This document is OBSOLETE and replaced by .

This document described the procedures for interconnecting two or more Network Virtualization Overlays (NVOs) via NVO over IP-only network. The solution interconnects Ethernet VPN network by using NVO with Ethernet VPN (EVPN) to facilitate the interconnect in a scalable fashion. The motivation is to support extension of Layer-2 and Layer-3, Unicast and Multicast, VPNs without having to rely on typical Data Center Interconnect (DCI) technologies like MPLS/VPLS. The requirements for the interconnect are similar to the ones specified in RFC7209 "Requirements for Ethernet VPN (EVPN)". In particular, this document describes the difference of the Gateways (GWs) procedure and incremental functionality from [RFC9014] "Interconnect Solution for Ethernet VPN (EVPN) Overlay Networks", which this solution is interoperable with. This document is OBSOLETE and replaced by .

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.

This authors would like to thank Max Ardica, Lukas Krattiger, Anuj Mittal, Lilian Quan, Veera Ravinutala, Murali Garimella, Tarun Wadhwa for their review and comments.

TBD.

TBD.

&RFC2119; L. Krattiger et. al. &RFC7209;

TBD.