>>> my read of 10.0.0.0/16-16 is an exact match
>>> and 10.0.0.0/16-32 is a subtree match ('orlonger' in JUNOS policy
>>> terms ;-))
>> yes.
> so why is it (per your previous example) 'invalid' then -
> since a exact match was requested and no exact match could be found
> it should be 'not found'.because we call it an attack. see all the specs. > if one wanted to match against the whole subtree then 10.0.0.0/16-32 > shall be advertised and signed; almost the opposite. >> fwiw, i do not remember junos as having a policy term to express >> 10.0.0.0/16-14 :) > e.g. route-filter 10.0.0.0/14 prefix-length-range /14-/16 cool randy _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
