Re: [Idr] draft-dong-idr-node-target-ext-comm-05.txt - WG Adoption and IPR call (9/27 to 10/11/2022) - Extended an Additional week to 10/18/2022

["Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jeff,

Sorry for the late response.

I was not referring to VRF Route Import Extended Community. I was referring to ASBR Import RT (as Jie replied in https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/Az6NJxXItQoC540wWLmM7lBAgCo/) . It is an IP Address Specific EC, with the local admin part being 0 so it is not VRF specific.

But it does not have to be limited to IP address specific. Any RT that is not specifically tied to a VRF can be used to target routes to nodes that are configured with that RT.

After the routes arrive on the targeted node, they can be imported into VRFs based on other ECs, e.g., an EC derived from a VPN RT as specified in draft-zzhang.

Jeffrey



Juniper Business Use Only
From: Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong=[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2022 1:00 AM
To: Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>; Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>
Cc: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <[e-mail]>; Dongjie (Jimmy) <[e-mail]>; Sue Hares <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [Idr] draft-dong-idr-node-target-ext-comm-05.txt - WG Adoption and IPR call (9/27 to 10/11/2022) - Extended an Additional week to 10/18/2022

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

Hi Jeff and Robert,

Thanks for this discussion. Please see my clarification inline.

From: Idr [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Haas
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2022 6:13 AM
To: Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang=[e-mail]<mailto:zzhang=[e-mail]>>; Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong=[e-mail]<mailto:jie.dong=[e-mail]>>; Sue Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-dong-idr-node-target-ext-comm-05.txt - WG Adoption and IPR call (9/27 to 10/11/2022) - Extended an Additional week to 10/18/2022

Robert,


On Oct 19, 2022, at 6:02 PM, Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Jeff,

On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 11:53 PM Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Jeffrey,

On Oct 18, 2022, at 11:05 PM, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang=[e-mail]<mailto:zzhang=[e-mail]>> wrote:

The red text is not correct. RFC 6514 already used <address:0> RT to target routes to a node, and as you say in the purple text the RT mechanism can be extended to non-VPN.


It's my understanding that the RFC 6514 VRF Route Import Extended Community is, as labeled, for VRF scope.

The proposal here is that this is node scoped, and thus addressed toward a node by its BGP Identifer (router-id).



The way I understand it by reading Jie's use case that this VRF scoped too. It could be nodes scoped and VRF scoped.

My understanding was that this was a logical AND case in such circumstances.  Thus, a specific node for a specific VPN and would have route targets in addition to the node-target.

Jie will hopefully clarify here.

[Jie] The intent of this proposal is node scoped. As Jeff clearly mentioned, there can be a logical AND between NT and RT. Thus in order to important routes to a specific VRF on a target node,  the route is attached with NT for the target node, AND RT for the VRF.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Jie

-- Jeff