Re: [Idr] Progressing draft-bhatia-bgp-multiple-next-hops-01.txt

[Enke Chen <enkechen at cisco.com>]

Hi, John:

John G. Scudder wrote:

> > As for choosing the identifiers, part of the problem is that in fact 
> > several of the proposed techniques (such as using the router-ID of 
> > the router you receive the advertisement from) will not work.
>
>
> I beg to differ, with one caveat: I see that at least the -05 add-path 
> draft doesn't mention that the path identifier is a per-connection 
> value (really, it can be per-speaker, the point is that it may be 
> regenenerated by anyone who advertises the route). As long as that's 
> understood (and I hope it'll be fixed in -06), then any algorithm 
> whatsoever that ensures uniqueness in the local context will work just 
> fine.


We will emphasize the "local significance" of the path identifier in the 
next revision, something along these text (as you suggested):

The Path Identifier is locally significant. Any BGP speaker
which re-advertises a route (for example, a route reflector)
MAY generate its own Path Identifier to associate with the
re-advertised route.

Thanks. -- Enke



_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr