Chris,
Have you read draft-ietf-grow-simple-va-04 ? There is nothing in the
draft nor in the implementation reg "route to the left".
It is all about "take the same door as your big boss when you exit and
when you get new smaller boss in the middle who exist differently via
different doors your net get's installed to still take a correct set of
doors out".
As described to Shane semantically this is identical in default
behaviour as installing all prefixes into RIB and FIB. However I would
argue that if you do it within the POP you can do much better savings
that the default behavior. But this is perhaps out of scope of this
thread ;-)
Cheers,
R.
On 10/25/2011 10:09 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
On Wednesday, October 26, 2011 05:12:09 AM Richard A
Steenbergen wrote:
c) Vendors would much rather sell you new cards wih more
FIB capacity than find a way to implement a "free"
solution in software (big shocker, I know). :)
I've been chatting with a major vendor about their interest
in implementing S-VA:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-grow-simple-va-04
'route to the left' ... you can do this today, VA only wraps a
'protocol' and (maybe) 'operational modality' around 'route to the left'.
There may be hope yet.
sure, 'route to the left' (tm: schil...@uu.net)
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
