Hi Robert, As long as there is a possibility of prefix overlapping within a given VPN instance, the mechanism defined in this draft would encounter the same problem that LISP had ever encountered.
Best regards, Xiaohu ________________________________________ 发件人: [email protected] [[email protected]] 代表 Robert Raszuk [[email protected]] 发送时间: 2013年11月9日 14:09 收件人: Xuxiaohu 抄送: [email protected]; [email protected] 主题: Re: [lisp] Prefix overlapping issue for draft-bonica-l3vpn-orf-covering-prefixes-00 Hi Xiaohu, While you are asking Ron directly you are cc-ing the lists so let me clarify your observation .. In each L3VPN context each PE advertise set of routes towards other PEs. Those routes are most often advertised via RR. I have never seen the case where RR or set of RRs would in any sort summarize routes more then PEs advertise. So if site has a host with the address of 10.10.10.10 which our high bandwith flow is destined to PE (or PEs) connected to such site will advertise the most specific subnet possible to reach 10.10.10.10. And that is all what is needed here. Based on the request from the v-spoke RR will return the longest match which will have next hop pointing to one of PEs connected the end site. I see really no problem there. If customer/provider on purpose enforced that to get to 10.10.10.10 you need to traverse some other site (for example DMZ/firewall/service XYZ) that is on purpose and we MUST honor it. This draft RFC7024 can not modify such routing enforced by customer. Best, R. PS. I see no relation to LISP here ;) _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
