Re: [Lsr] Prefix Unreachable Announcement Use Cases

[Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]>]

Robert & Acee

I have been working with Aijun to help clean up the verbiage in the draft
which after IETF 109 will plan to do an update based on feedback.

I will be presenting this draft as well as the passive interface draft
tomorrow morning.

It has been challenging trying to graphically depict Aijun’s goals and
intentions but I have tried my best to do so in the presentation tomorrow
morning.

Kind Regards

Gyan

On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 11:44 AM Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Aijun,
>
> I would in fact only propose that the presented mechanism is narrowed down
> to invalidate BGP (service) routes - in fact their next hops.
>
> The reason being that the moment you make the solution generic, moreover
> the moment you want it to be used in RIB and data plane I am afraid you are
> running into similar (even if local) deaggregation mechanism like recently
> described in RIFT. That would kill all the scalability of advertising
> summary routes in the first place and I bet would face lots of opposition.
>
> Thx,
> R.
>
>
>> I would actually trim most use cases leaving just one - to signal remote
>> service node (ex: PE) going down in the presence of summary route being
>> advertised from remote area or pop.
>>
>>  [WAJ] Yes, this may be the most useful use case, but the PUA mechanism
> can also apply to other scenarios. We want to make it one general solution.
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>
-- 

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *



*M 301 502-134713101 Columbia Pike *Silver Spring, MD