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

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

mplementations simply default to the PE's BGP Identifier.  But similarly,
> it's a feature of some implementations to permit this to be configured
> distinct from the PE's BGP Identifier.
>

The use case why this was introduced was to enable VRF to VRF eBGP session
via firewalls (other types of chaining). Without running into BGP session
BGP_ID checks (not that many implementations actually check it :).


> > To your point of withdrawal, I see that the extended community is linked
> > with MP_REACH. If MP_UNREACH is in the same UPDATE the nodes which should
> > get the MP_UNREACH may not even get the withdrawal.
>

> I'm unable to parse your English here.  Please provide an explicit example.
>


Deepest apologies. Maybe indeed my example was unclear. Let me try much
cleaner one:

net_X has two paths P1 and P2. P1 had NT 1.1.1.1 and was best. Was sent as
such to 1.1.1.1

Now for whatever reason P2 got selected as best but it's NT is 2.2.2.2

When we build UPDATE we just include net-X + P2. Business as usual.

Well don't you think node 1.1.1.1 will remain stuck with net_X forever ?

Just think for 10 sec about troubleshooting this ... That is what I meant
by the importance of "key" for withdrawal.

Many thx,
R.