On 10/13/18, 5:28 AM, "GROW on behalf of Zhuangshunwan" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> on behalf of [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Qing, Inline with [Shunwan]. Thanks, Shunwan From: Qing Yang [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2018 2:27 AM To: Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> Cc: Zhuangshunwan <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [GROW] bmp loc-rib monitoring scope question (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-grow-bmp-local-rib-02.txt) Right. And the locRib peer header doesn't really have way to do more than 1 anyway. [Shunwan] IMO, Section 5.2 of draft-ietf-grow-bmp-local-rib-02 describe a method to send best ecmp group to BMP Station. BMP client can signal add-paths capability to BMP Station via BMP Peer UP message, then BMP Station will know that the client will send multiple NLRI for one destination. That is my understanding. Correct. The draft is not inventing another method to convey additional/best-routes. BGP add-paths can be used to advertise the ECMP paths. Note, this does not include ECMP where FIB is performing ECMP based on a single best-route next-hop/label/etc. While add-paths supports sending non-best, IMO I would like the draft to restrict the usage of add-paths to only convey best-routes if using add-paths with local-rib. IMO, FIB is out of scope for BMP. --Tim
_______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
