Hi Aijun, > #3 > > > [WAJ] It is the IGP advertises the inaccurate information, why let BGP > clear up? Won’t you estimate the IDR experts will resist? > > There is nothing inaccurate in the IGP advertisement. IGP does > precisely what the operator configured it to do. > > [WAJ] It lack some more precise control mechanisms. Currently it can only > allow all, or advertise all. >
Yes - and this is a good problem to be fixed. To me this is day one spec bug. Leaking should not be sender, but receiver driven. In fact one could also argue that leaking does not need to be flooded, but send by IGP as unicast. Maybe using reflection for scalability. I think no one here will object to fixing it. However if you want to break what is working fine (even if only during rear and stressful moments to the IGP) that is not the right approach. [WAJ] First, the reachable underlay information is not advertised via BGP. > I am talking about building hierarchy. You have: #3 - NLRI: Service Routing with PE_NH (BGP) #2 - NLRI: PE_NH advertisement with ABR as NH (BGP) #1 - ABR IGP underlay (with summaries) (IGP) Thinking more on this #2 perhaps can use BGP-LS (maybe first decent use case for this SAFI :) Thx, R.
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
