IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: BGP-4+

Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com> Mon, 23 December 1996 15:37 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa25222; 23 Dec 96 10:37 EST
Received: from merit.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10490; 23 Dec 96 10:37 EST
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by merit.edu (8.8.4/merit-2.0) id KAA09202 for idr-outgoing; Mon, 23 Dec 1996 10:17:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from interlock.ans.net (interlock.ans.net [147.225.5.5]) by merit.edu (8.8.4/merit-2.0) with SMTP id KAA09197 for <bgp@merit.edu>; Mon, 23 Dec 1996 10:17:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: by interlock.ans.net id AA27861 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for bgp@ans.net); Mon, 23 Dec 1996 10:17:21 -0500
Received: by interlock.ans.net (Internal Mail Agent-1); Mon, 23 Dec 1996 10:17:21 -0500
Message-Id: <199612231517.HAA06877@puli.cisco.com>
To: "John W. Stewart III" <jstewart@metro.isi.edu>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, bgp@ans.net
Subject: Re: BGP-4+
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 23 Dec 96 10:10:04 EST." <199612231510.AA13702@metro.isi.edu>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 96 07:17:17 PST
From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com>
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk

John,
 
> i guess i don't understand the spec completely, then.
> how do you specify no NLRI, then?  a prefix-length of
> 0 doesn't do it because that means 0.0.0.0/0, right?

No. You just don't specify NLRI at all. Means that the length of the
Network Layer Reachability Information field is 0.  We already have
cases with BGP-4 where an UPDATE message doesn't carry any NLRI - when
the message is used just to withdraw routes from service.

Yakov.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email