Hi Tony,
> It is OK for IGPs to advertise multiple summaries (e.g., multiple /24s > instead of a single /16). > It is even OK for IGPs to advertise some prefixes covered by a summary > along with the summary (don’t know if any implementations do this - but > they could). > None of this is an "architectural violation". > > Hopefully, these violations of abstraction are carefully considered manual > exceptions that will not explode in the end user’s face at the worst > possible time. > Actually all of the above explode immediately and that is a feature not a bug. Once enabled if a user sees some form of network meltdown or issue it can shut it off and modify the network. That is why I am against ephemeral nature of the proposed mechanism. As such this can be seen as altitude based ticking bomb just waiting to reach the high enough flight level. Best, Robert
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
