Hi Yao, Thanks for bringing this up. I’ve followed up further in the main thread.
Regards, —John > On Feb 17, 2022, at 1:44 AM, liu.ya...@zte.com.cn wrote: > > > > 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
