On 21 October 2015 at 22:05, Chad Myers <chad.my...@theice.com> wrote:
Hey Chad, > Please don't go the IOS/EOS/non-Junos method for rpd where each protocol is > completely independent and isolated from the others. It is extremely helpful > to be able to do things like put communities on static routes. Even > protocols that don't use communities can leverage them in the export policy, > the community just isn't announced. Ditto for import policies. > > Sacrificing that flexibility and simplicity to multithread rpd and shifting > to explicit route redistribution with limited route attributes per protocol > would be a huge loss. You don't need to worry, these two issues have nothing in common. What you're talking about is very high level concept and it implies nothing about the underlaying architecture. Having said that, why on earth no tags/communities on direct/connected routes on any(?) platform. It dilutes usefulness in static routes as well, as you're still going to need to have logic to provision prefix-lists, so might as well do it same way for statics and directs. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
