Hello, Looking at the archives on this topic, there was a small discussion about the structure of the NLRI as proposed in the BGP CAR draft. The conversation was not conclusive and here’s my thought and a question related to the topic.
While the proposed NLRI format enables NLRI types to be encoded and provides extensibility, it also lists the key and non-key fields. If we go down this path, there may be a tendency to add more fields into the NLRI. While ‘Type-specific Key Fields’ may be justifiable (for obvious reasons of identifying the NLRI), the ‘Type-specific Non-Key Fields’ has a potential to grow. Also, this is a departure from base BGP specification of NLRI and attributes where attributes carry the common information and non-key fields. Am wondering if the authors have done more investigation on this. Thanks. srihari… Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
