Re: [Idr] Returning draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis to WG, new 2 week discussion period

[Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 11:54:22PM +0200, Christoph Loibl wrote:
> I have no lab at hand (now) - but I am really curios how ie. Juniper (also
> other vendors) actually validate FS without a destination-prefix component
> (to be honest, I never tried this - but it is supposed to be easily
> verified).

I will somewhat coyly note that John's text does not come out of pure
protocol pedantry. :-)

Juniper's implementation doesn't do useful things when the dest-prefix is
absence and validation is on.  This was noted during some internal testing.
When we were approached for "what should we do, it's not in the spec", the
proposed text arose out of internal discussion. (Including "well, it's
effectively 0/0.)

The pedantic behavior would be to say "it's 0/0", but it leads to the
"originate default" as an answer.  This is not behavior we'd operationally
encourage and thus we are having this discussion.

-- Jeff