Hi Sasha, Having multiple RT in a BGP update is usual BGP procedures. I do not think we need to have anything explicit with respect to mVPN procedures.
But I will let Jeffery comment if he thinks otherwise. Mankamana From: Alexander Vainshtein <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 at 6:42 AM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Cc: BESS <[email protected]> Subject: A question about Section 11.1.3 of draft-zzhang-bess-rfc6514bis Jeffrey and Mankamana, I have a question regarding Section 11.3 of the 6514bis draft<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-zzhang-bess-rfc6514bis-00#section-11.1.3>. The last but one para of this section says (the relevant text is highlighted): From the selected UMH route, the local PE extracts (a) the ASN of the upstream PE (as carried in the Source AS Extended Community of the route), and (b) the C-multicast Import RT of the VRF on the upstream PE (the value of this C-multicast Import RT is the value of the VRF Route Import Extended Community carried by the route). The Source AS field in the C-multicast route is set to that AS. The Route Target Extended Community of the C-multicast route is set to that C-multicast Import RT. I wonder if there are any situations in which more than one Route Target is attached to the C-multicast route? And if such a route is received, how should this situation be handled? Regards, and lots of thanks in advance, Sasha Disclaimer This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information of Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, disclosure, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and then delete all copies, including any attachments.
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
