Re: [GROW] RR reflection to clients

["UTTARO, JAMES, ATTLABS" <uttaro at att.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: grow-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:grow-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Iljitsch van Beijnum
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 9:43 AM
To: Shane Amante
Cc: grow at ietf.org grow at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [GROW] RR reflection to clients

On 27 mrt 2009, at 3:43, Shane Amante wrote:

> Re: your comment on "breaking groupwise processing" ... don't RR's  
> already have to account for not sending updates to a specific peer  
> (or, set of peers) based on various ORF types they've received from  
> that peer (assuming ORF's are enabled)?  Why can't that same code/ 
> logic apply here (i.e.: it's already written, why can't we re-use it  
> here)?

>>Hm, aren't filters on iBGP sessions considered bad style?

>>I don't know what implementations do when peer group members send  
>>ORFs, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that this would make the  
>>peer group processing advantages disappear.

One of the big concerns from an RR perspective when deciding whether to
deploy ORF.

Jim Uttaro
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
GROW at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow