Hi, Ron and John both mentioned that leveraging the existing AFI/SAFI may cause misunderstanding of the SRv6 service routes. We encountered this problem during implementation and submitted a draft talking about this. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lz-bess-srv6-service-capability-02 One solution(if new AFI/SAFI is not defined) we proposed in the draft is to define a new BGP capability code for for SRv6-based BGP service capability, and then SRv6 service routes would only be exchanged between devices that support it based on this capability. Do you think this is a possible solution?
Regards, Yao _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
