Re: [Idr] Adoption and IPR call for draft-wang-idr-vpn-prefix-orf-03.txt (8/16 to 8/30)

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Gyan,


> I am not understanding this in quotes
>
“ but it is still receiving new routes from the RR (RR hasn`t received and
> processed the ORF message).”
>

In addition to what Igor kindly already illustrated, let me also add a new
dimension to this which apparently is not obvious.

ORF action can be IMMEDIATE or DEFERED.

When as in your examples from section 8 you set to IMMEDIATE then you get a
full VPN table dump after each ORF msg. Yes filtered routes may not be
there, but you will receive all eligible routes minus those in ORF message.

And if you send second ORF entry with IMMEDIATE field it will be pending
completion of the first table dump just to start another one and another
... Getting full table in BGP is always stressful to the BGP speaker
especially here when number of VPN routes may exceed capacity od the node.

On the other hand if you DEFER your routes which caused the issue in the
first place will still be there for some time till you send ROUTE-REFRESH
to said RR.

Draft fails to discuss this aspect and indicate when and what type of ORF
message will be sent.

Thx,
R.