Re: [Idr] Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-pmohapat-idr-acceptown-community-01.txt

["Jim Guichard (jguichar)" <[e-mail]>]

 
> Typical VRF configuration is import-route-target A and
> export-route-target B.  If A == B for some A and B in the extended
> community set they're in the same VPN.

I would say that the typical VRF configuration is
import-route-target/export-route-target are the same value.

> 
> I'm curious as to the configuration of the route targets that would
> require this to be done.  I hadn't thought about the case where the RR
> is actively manipulating the route-targets.  If the goal is to stitch
> together a single set of VRFs, you have the additional problem of
> needing to constrain where the route is reflected.

Lets say VPN-a uses RT 100:1 and VPN-b uses RT 100:2. In order to create
an extranet you need to import RT 100:2 into VPN-a and RT 100:1 into
VPN-b. This is an additional import statement. However, if you change
the VPN-b route RT values at the RR then VPN-a can import based on RT
100:1.

> 
> If it's across multiple PEs, this implies something along the lines of
> RT A and RT B are distinct on a per VRF basis.  This seems somewhat
> unlikely (at least on the completely distinct basis) since it wouldn't
> scale well for many VRFs being in the same VPN.

It is 100% likely and indeed necessary should you want different VPNs.

> 
> Could you clarify on the likely setup for this feature?
> 
> -- Jeff
_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr