<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude"
     version="3"
     category="info"
     docName="draft-zl-srv6ops-srv6-vxlan-gateway-00"
     ipr="trust200902"
     submissionType="IETF">

  <front>
    <title abbrev="VXLAN and SRv6 Gateway Deployment">
      VXLAN and SRv6 Gateway Deployment Options and Considerations
    </title>

    <!-- Replace the following author information before submission. -->
	<author initials="X." surname="Zhang" fullname="Xiaoqiu Zhang">
      <organization>China Mobile</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>zhangxiaoqiu@chinamobile.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="C." surname="Lin" fullname="Changwang Lin">
      <organization>New H3C Technologies</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>linchangwang.04414@h3c.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
	

    <date year="2026" month="October" day="31"/>

    <area>Operations and Management</area>
    <workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>

    <keyword>VXLAN</keyword>
    <keyword>SRv6</keyword>
    <keyword>EVPN</keyword>
    <keyword>gateway</keyword>
    <keyword>data center</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>
        VXLAN is widely deployed in data center networks, often with
        Ethernet VPN (EVPN) as its control plane. Segment Routing over
        IPv6 (SRv6) is used to provide services and path control over
        IPv6 networks, including networks connecting data centers and
        wide area networks.
      </t>
      <t>
        This document describes deployment options for connecting
        VXLAN-based data center networks to SRv6 networks. These options
        include VXLAN and SRv6 service interworking at a gateway, and
        the transport of VXLAN traffic over an SRv6 network. The
        document discusses their characteristics, deployment trade-offs,
        and operational considerations.
      </t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>

    <section anchor="introduction">
      <name>Introduction</name>

      <t>
        VXLAN <xref target="RFC7348"/> is widely used in data center
        networks to provide network virtualization over an IP underlay.
        A VXLAN Network Identifier (VNI) identifies a VXLAN segment, and
        VXLAN Tunnel Endpoints (VTEPs) encapsulate and decapsulate
        tenant traffic.
      </t>

      <t>
        Ethernet VPN (EVPN) <xref target="RFC7432"/> is commonly used
        as the control plane for VXLAN networks. EVPN provides
        mechanisms for advertising MAC and IP reachability information
        and supporting multihoming. Its use with network virtualization
        overlays is described in <xref target="RFC8365"/>.
      </t>

      <t>
        Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) <xref target="RFC8986"/> uses
        IPv6 addresses to encode Segment Identifiers (SIDs) and their
        associated behaviors. SRv6 can be used to provide VPN services
        and path control over IPv6 networks. BGP-based overlay services
        using SRv6 are described in <xref target="RFC9252"/>.
      </t>

      <t>
        As operators deploy SRv6 in networks connecting data centers
        and wide area networks, they may need to connect existing
        VXLAN-based data center networks to SRv6-based transport or VPN
        services. Deploying functions at the data center boundary can
        enable this connectivity while allowing the data center and the
        external network to retain their respective architectures.
      </t>

      <t>This document discusses two deployment options:</t>

      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          VXLAN and SRv6 interworking: A gateway terminates the
          encapsulation received from one network and forwards the
          traffic using the encapsulation and service associated with
          the other network. Control-plane route processing may also be
          required.
        </li>
        <li>
          VXLAN over SRv6: VXLAN encapsulation is retained between
          VTEPs, while an SRv6 network carries the traffic between them.
        </li>
      </ul>

      <t>
        These options may coexist in a network. For example, an
        operator may use service interworking for most tenants while
        using VXLAN over SRv6 for selected applications.
      </t>

      <t>
        This document does not define new protocol mechanisms. The
        availability of the described functions depends on the
        applicable specifications and device implementations.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="terminology">
      <name>Terminology</name>

      <dl newline="true">
        <dt>VTEP:</dt>
        <dd>VXLAN Tunnel Endpoint.</dd>

        <dt>VNI:</dt>
        <dd>VXLAN Network Identifier.</dd>

        <dt>VRF:</dt>
        <dd>Virtual Routing and Forwarding instance.</dd>

        <dt>SID:</dt>
        <dd>Segment Identifier.</dd>

        <dt>SRH:</dt>
        <dd>Segment Routing Header.</dd>

        <dt>BUM:</dt>
        <dd>Broadcast, Unknown unicast, and Multicast.</dd>

        <dt>Boundary gateway:</dt>
        <dd>
          A node at the boundary between network domains that provides
          service interworking or connects traffic to an SRv6 transport
          network.
        </dd>

        <dt>Service interworking:</dt>
        <dd>
          The association of services in different network domains,
          including data-plane encapsulation processing and any required
          control-plane route processing.
        </dd>
      </dl>
    </section>

    <section anchor="deployment-options">
      <name>Deployment Options</name>

      <section anchor="interworking">
        <name>VXLAN and SRv6 Interworking</name>

        <t>
          In this option, VXLAN is used within the data center, while
          SRv6 is used in the external network. A boundary gateway
          associates the services on the two sides and forwards traffic
          between them.
        </t>

        <figure anchor="fig-interworking">
          <name>VXLAN and SRv6 Interworking</name>
          <artwork type="ascii-art"><![CDATA[
      Data Center                                  Remote Network
  +------------------+                         +------------------+
  | VTEP             |                         | PE or Gateway    |
  +--------+---------+                         +---------+--------+
           |                                             |
           | VXLAN                                       | SRv6
           |                                             |
  +--------+---------------------------------------------+--------+
  |                    Boundary Gateway                           |
  |            Service association and forwarding                 |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>
          For traffic from the VXLAN domain to the SRv6 domain, the
          gateway typically:
        </t>

        <ol spacing="normal">
          <li>Receives and terminates the VXLAN encapsulation.</li>
          <li>
            Associates the VNI with a local Layer 2 service instance or
            IP VRF.
          </li>
          <li>
            Selects the corresponding service in the SRv6 domain.
          </li>
          <li>
            Forwards the traffic using the encapsulation and forwarding
            behavior required by that service.
          </li>
        </ol>

        <t>
          Traffic in the reverse direction is processed accordingly.
        </t>

        <t>
          Depending on the control planes used on each side, the gateway
          may also need to import, export, or re-advertise reachability
          information. The required processing depends on the service
          type and implementation.
        </t>

        <section anchor="evpn-vxlan-l3vpn-srv6">
          <name>EVPN VXLAN and L3VPN SRv6 Interworking</name>

          <t>
            In this option, the data center uses EVPN VXLAN, while the
            external network provides an SRv6-based Layer 3 VPN service.
          </t>

          <figure anchor="fig-l3vpn-interworking">
            <name>EVPN VXLAN and L3VPN SRv6 Interworking</name>
            <artwork type="ascii-art"><![CDATA[
  EVPN VXLAN Data Center    Boundary Gateway       SRv6 L3VPN
  +-------------------+     +---------------+     +-------------+
  | VTEP              |-----| IP VRF        |-----| L3VPN PE    |
  +-------------------+     +---------------+     +-------------+
                      VXLAN                 SRv6
]]></artwork>
          </figure>

          <t>
            This option is primarily intended for Layer 3 connectivity.
            The gateway associates the tenant VRF on the VXLAN side with
            the corresponding VPN service on the SRv6 side.
          </t>

          <t>
            IP reachability learned from the data center may need to be
            introduced into the L3VPN control plane. In the reverse
            direction, L3VPN routes may need to be introduced into the
            EVPN VXLAN domain. Because the two sides use different VPN
            route types and attributes, operators cannot assume that
            routes can be exchanged transparently without processing.
          </t>

          <t>The deployment needs to account for the following:</t>

          <ul spacing="normal">
            <li>
              The EVPN routes and associated IP reachability information
              that an implementation can use for interworking.
            </li>
            <li>
              Route import, export, or re-advertisement capabilities.
            </li>
            <li>
              Route Targets, next-hop handling, and other attributes
              required on each side.
            </li>
            <li>
              Route filtering, loop prevention, and tenant isolation.
            </li>
          </ul>

          <t>
            An L3VPN provides IP connectivity. It does not by itself
            preserve EVPN Layer 2 service semantics, such as a shared
            Ethernet broadcast domain or Layer 2 MAC learning across the
            boundary.
          </t>

          <t>
            This option is suitable when data center tenants need IP
            connectivity to an SRv6 L3VPN network and do not require
            Layer 2 extension across the boundary.
          </t>
        </section>

        <section anchor="evpn-vxlan-evpn-srv6">
          <name>EVPN VXLAN and EVPN SRv6 Interworking</name>

          <t>
            In this option, both network domains use EVPN, while their
            data planes use VXLAN and SRv6, respectively.
          </t>

          <figure anchor="fig-evpn-interworking">
            <name>EVPN VXLAN and EVPN SRv6 Interworking</name>
            <artwork type="ascii-art"><![CDATA[
  EVPN VXLAN Data Center    Boundary Gateway       EVPN SRv6
  +-------------------+     +---------------+     +-------------+
  | VTEP              |-----| EVPN Boundary |-----| EVPN PE     |
  +-------------------+     +---------------+     +-------------+
                      VXLAN                 SRv6
]]></artwork>
          </figure>

          <t>
            The gateway associates the EVPN service instances on the
            two sides and processes the data-plane encapsulations.
            Depending on the service and implementation, the
            interworking may provide:
          </t>

          <ul spacing="normal">
            <li>
              Layer 3 connectivity using tenant IP reachability
              information.
            </li>
            <li>
              Layer 2 connectivity using MAC and IP reachability
              information.
            </li>
          </ul>

          <t>
            Although both sides use EVPN, routes may still require
            processing at the boundary. For example, next hops,
            encapsulation-related information, service identifiers, or
            routing-policy attributes may need to be changed or
            re-advertised.
          </t>

          <t>
            Layer 2 interworking also requires consideration of BUM
            traffic, multihoming, MAC mobility, and loop prevention.
            Operators need to verify which Layer 2 service functions are
            supported across the boundary by the relevant
            implementations.
          </t>

          <t>
            This option is suitable when both domains use EVPN and the
            operator requires Layer 3 connectivity or, where supported,
            Layer 2 connectivity between them.
          </t>
        </section>

        <section anchor="interworking-tradeoffs">
          <name>Advantages and Limitations</name>

          <t>
            Advantages of VXLAN and SRv6 interworking include:
          </t>

          <ul spacing="normal">
            <li>
              Each domain can use its own encapsulation and service
              architecture.
            </li>
            <li>
              The boundary can provide a point for tenant isolation,
              route filtering, and fault containment.
            </li>
            <li>
              Routes can be filtered or aggregated at the boundary,
              subject to the desired reachability and failure behavior.
            </li>
            <li>
              Layer 3 interworking can avoid extending Layer 2 domains
              across the network.
            </li>
          </ul>

          <t>Limitations and operational costs include:</t>

          <ul spacing="normal">
            <li>
              The gateway needs to support the required service
              associations, forwarding functions, and control-plane
              processing.
            </li>
            <li>
              Service identifiers and routes may require mapping or
              re-advertisement.
            </li>
            <li>
              The gateway can become a capacity bottleneck or a
              concentrated point of failure unless redundancy is
              provided.
            </li>
            <li>
              Support for specific route types, Layer 2 functions, and
              multihoming behavior may vary between implementations.
            </li>
          </ul>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section anchor="vxlan-over-srv6">
        <name>VXLAN over SRv6</name>

        <t>
          In this option, VXLAN encapsulation is retained between VTEPs,
          and an SRv6 network carries the traffic between them. A
          boundary node may steer VTEP-to-VTEP traffic into an SRv6 path
          without converting the VXLAN service into an SRv6 VPN service.
        </t>

        <figure anchor="fig-vxlan-over-srv6">
          <name>VXLAN over SRv6</name>
          <artwork type="ascii-art"><![CDATA[
  Data Center A        SRv6 Transport Network       Data Center B
  +------------+       +------------------------+    +------------+
  | VTEP A     |=======| SRv6 path or policy    |====| VTEP B     |
  +------------+       +------------------------+    +------------+

             VXLAN traffic is retained between VTEPs
]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>
          In one possible deployment, traffic between VTEPs is
          encapsulated when it enters the SRv6 transport network. At the
          SRv6 tunnel egress, the outer SRv6 encapsulation is removed,
          and the VXLAN packet is forwarded toward the destination VTEP.
          The destination VTEP then terminates the VXLAN encapsulation.
        </t>

        <t>An illustrative packet format is shown below:</t>

        <figure anchor="fig-packet-format">
          <name>Illustrative VXLAN over SRv6 Packet Format</name>
          <artwork type="ascii-art"><![CDATA[
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
  | Outer IPv6 header                                             |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
  | SRH, when present                                             |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
  | VTEP-to-VTEP IP header                                        |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
  | UDP | VXLAN | Tenant packet                                   |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>
          The actual packet format depends on the SRv6 encapsulation
          mode and implementation. The VTEP address family and the
          supported encapsulation combinations also depend on the
          devices used.
        </t>

        <t>
          Using an SRv6 network to transport VXLAN does not, by itself,
          provide an SRv6 VPN service or establish an EVPN control
          plane between sites. VTEP reachability and any cross-site EVPN
          control-plane connectivity require separate design.
        </t>

        <section anchor="vxlan-over-srv6-tradeoffs">
          <name>Advantages and Limitations</name>

          <t>Advantages of VXLAN over SRv6 include:</t>

          <ul spacing="normal">
            <li>
              VXLAN service encapsulation is retained between VTEPs.
            </li>
            <li>
              The boundary node does not necessarily need to translate
              VXLAN services into SRv6 VPN services.
            </li>
            <li>
              SRv6 path-control capabilities may be used for transport,
              depending on the deployment.
            </li>
            <li>
              The impact on the existing VXLAN service model may be
              limited.
            </li>
          </ul>

          <t>Limitations and operational costs include:</t>

          <ul spacing="normal">
            <li>
              Additional encapsulation increases packet overhead and may
              affect MTU and forwarding performance.
            </li>
            <li>
              VTEP reachability, traffic steering, and SRv6 tunnel
              termination require explicit design.
            </li>
            <li>
              VXLAN and EVPN service state may extend across sites,
              increasing the scope of failures and operational
              dependencies.
            </li>
            <li>
              Cross-site Layer 2 services can increase BUM traffic and
              the complexity of MAC mobility, ARP and Neighbor
              Discovery, and multihoming operations.
            </li>
          </ul>
        </section>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="considerations">
      <name>Considerations</name>

      <section anchor="selection">
        <name>Selecting a Deployment Option</name>

        <t>
          Operators can select an option based on the required service,
          the role of the SRv6 network, implementation support, and
          operational boundaries.
        </t>

        <dl newline="true">
          <dt>Service requirement:</dt>
          <dd>
            Interworking is suitable when services are terminated or
            associated at the boundary, especially for Layer 3
            connectivity. VXLAN over SRv6 is suitable when VXLAN
            encapsulation is to be retained between VTEPs.
          </dd>

          <dt>Role of the SRv6 network:</dt>
          <dd>
            With interworking, the SRv6 network provides a VPN or other
            service to which the data center connects. With VXLAN over
            SRv6, the SRv6 network primarily transports
            VTEP-to-VTEP traffic.
          </dd>

          <dt>Control plane:</dt>
          <dd>
            Interworking may require route import, export, or
            re-advertisement at the gateway. With VXLAN over SRv6,
            cross-site VTEP reachability and, if used, EVPN
            control-plane connectivity need to be provided separately.
          </dd>

          <dt>Fault containment:</dt>
          <dd>
            An interworking gateway can provide a boundary for limiting
            route and Layer 2 fault propagation. With VXLAN over SRv6,
            service state and failures may have a wider cross-site
            scope.
          </dd>

          <dt>Device capabilities:</dt>
          <dd>
            Interworking requires the relevant service interworking and
            forwarding functions. VXLAN over SRv6 requires compatible
            VXLAN, IP, SRv6 encapsulation, steering, and forwarding
            functions.
          </dd>

          <dt>Encapsulation overhead:</dt>
          <dd>
            With interworking, each domain uses its respective
            encapsulation. With VXLAN over SRv6, nested encapsulation
            requires particular attention to MTU and performance.
          </dd>
        </dl>

        <t>A deployment selection process can proceed as follows:</t>

        <ol spacing="normal">
          <li>
            Determine whether the application requires Layer 2
            connectivity across the boundary or only IP connectivity.
          </li>
          <li>
            Determine whether the SRv6 network provides a VPN service or
            primarily acts as a transport network.
          </li>
          <li>
            Verify device support for the required control-plane and
            data-plane functions.
          </li>
          <li>
            Define operational and fault-management boundaries.
          </li>
          <li>
            Validate forwarding, failure recovery, scale, and
            performance before production deployment.
          </li>
        </ol>
      </section>

      <section anchor="gateway-placement">
        <name>Gateway Placement and High Availability</name>

        <t>
          Interworking gateways can be deployed centrally at data center
          exits or distributed across multiple boundary nodes.
        </t>

        <t>
          A centralized deployment may simplify policy and service
          management, but it can concentrate traffic and failure impact.
          A distributed deployment may provide additional capacity and
          more local forwarding, but it can increase configuration and
          consistency requirements.
        </t>

        <t>Operators should evaluate:</t>

        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            Gateway, link, and control-plane failure detection and
            recovery.
          </li>
          <li>
            Redundancy and traffic steering across multiple gateways.
          </li>
          <li>Route consistency and loop prevention.</li>
          <li>
            Load distribution and capacity during normal operation and
            failures.
          </li>
          <li>
            Asymmetric forwarding and its effect on stateful services.
          </li>
        </ul>
      </section>

      <section anchor="tenant-isolation">
        <name>Tenant and Route Isolation</name>

        <t>
          The relationship between VNIs, EVPN instances, IP VRFs, and
          services in the SRv6 domain needs to be clearly defined.
        </t>

        <t>Deployment planning should include:</t>

        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            Allocation and scope of tenant and service identifiers.
          </li>
          <li>
            Route Distinguisher and Route Target configuration.
          </li>
          <li>Route import and export policies.</li>
          <li>IPv4 and IPv6 reachability and advertisement scope.</li>
          <li>
            Route-source identification and loop prevention when routes
            are re-advertised.
          </li>
          <li>
            The effect of route aggregation on reachability, convergence,
            and fault diagnosis.
          </li>
          <li>
            Prevention of unintended route leaking between tenants.
          </li>
        </ul>
      </section>

      <section anchor="layer2-scope">
        <name>Layer 2 Service Scope</name>

        <t>
          When Layer 2 connectivity is extended across domains or sites,
          operators should evaluate:
        </t>

        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>MAC and IP route propagation.</li>
          <li>MAC mobility and host reachability.</li>
          <li>ARP and Neighbor Discovery suppression.</li>
          <li>BUM traffic replication and expected traffic volume.</li>
          <li>
            Multihoming behavior and Designated Forwarder election,
            where applicable.
          </li>
          <li>Layer 2 loop prevention and failure containment.</li>
        </ul>

        <t>
          If applications require only IP connectivity, a Layer 3
          interworking design may reduce the amount of Layer 2 state and
          the scope of Layer 2 failures.
        </t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="mtu-performance-scale">
        <name>MTU, Performance, and Scale</name>

        <t>
          The end-to-end MTU should be calculated using the
          encapsulations actually used along the path. VXLAN over SRv6
          requires particular attention to nested encapsulation and any
          SRH overhead.
        </t>

        <t>Validation should include:</t>

        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            Hardware forwarding support for the selected encapsulation
            combinations.
          </li>
          <li>
            Supported SID-list lengths and their performance impact.
          </li>
          <li>
            Throughput and packet rate under normal and failure
            conditions.
          </li>
          <li>
            VNI, VRF, route, MAC, ARP, Neighbor Discovery, tunnel, and
            SID scale.
          </li>
          <li>
            Large-packet handling, Path MTU Discovery, and packet-drop
            behavior.
          </li>
          <li>
            Available capacity after a gateway or link failure.
          </li>
        </ul>
      </section>

      <section anchor="operational-visibility">
        <name>Security and Operational Visibility</name>

        <t>
          Operators should define trust boundaries and restrict the
          acceptance of routing information and data-plane traffic to
          authorized sources.
        </t>

        <t>
          Operational visibility should allow an operator to associate
          tenant services with their VNIs, VRFs, gateways, SIDs, and
          transport paths. Monitoring and troubleshooting should cover:
        </t>

        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Control-plane state and route advertisements.</li>
          <li>
            Data-plane counters, packet drops, and encapsulation errors.
          </li>
          <li>End-to-end service reachability.</li>
          <li>MTU and performance problems.</li>
          <li>
            Configuration changes, rollback procedures, and
            responsibilities across operational teams.
          </li>
        </ul>

        <t>
          Additional security considerations are discussed in
          <xref target="security"/>.
        </t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="deployment-validation">
        <name>Deployment and Migration Validation</name>

        <t>
          Before production deployment, operators should validate at
          least:
        </t>

        <ol spacing="normal">
          <li>
            Bidirectional forwarding for the required IPv4 and IPv6
            services.
          </li>
          <li>
            Route installation, withdrawal, and policy changes.
          </li>
          <li>
            Gateway, VTEP, link, and control-plane failure recovery.
          </li>
          <li>
            Loop prevention and load distribution in multi-gateway
            deployments.
          </li>
          <li>
            Maximum packet sizes, MTU mismatches, and encapsulation
            errors.
          </li>
          <li>
            Forwarding and control-plane scale under expected operating
            conditions.
          </li>
          <li>
            Interoperability across vendors and software versions.
          </li>
        </ol>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="security">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>

      <t>
        The deployment options in this document introduce boundaries
        between network domains and, in some cases, between different
        service control planes. Incorrect configuration at these
        boundaries can cause traffic misdelivery, unintended tenant
        connectivity, or route leaks.
      </t>

      <t>Operators should apply appropriate controls to:</t>

      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          Authenticate and authorize control-plane peers where supported.
        </li>
        <li>
          Filter routes and limit the services and tenants exchanged
          across boundaries.
        </li>
        <li>
          Accept VXLAN traffic only from authorized VTEPs or trusted
          network locations.
        </li>
        <li>
          Protect SRv6 domains against unauthorized traffic that invokes
          internal SIDs.
        </li>
        <li>
          Validate service mappings and forwarding policies during
          configuration changes.
        </li>
        <li>
          Monitor for unexpected route advertisements, traffic patterns,
          and encapsulation errors.
        </li>
      </ul>

      <t>
        VXLAN over SRv6 can extend the reach of a VXLAN or EVPN service
        across sites. Operators should consider whether the resulting
        trust and failure boundaries are acceptable for the applications
        carried.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="iana">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>

      <t>This document has no IANA actions.</t>
    </section>

  </middle>

  <back>
    <references>
      <name>Informative References</name>

      <xi:include
          href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7348.xml"/>

      <xi:include
          href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7432.xml"/>

      <xi:include
          href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8365.xml"/>

      <xi:include
          href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8986.xml"/>

      <xi:include
          href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9252.xml"/>
    </references>
  </back>

</rfc>