All, Reading the below I have a tiny question -
Can UPA be a (sub)summary route covering in one shot more than one address which went down ? Or is there any mandate in the draft that UPA MUST ALWAYS be /32 or /128 only ? Apologies if I missed an answer to it in the text of the draft. Thx, R. > KT> Section 2 has the following text: > > Implementations MAY limit the UPA generation to specific prefixes, e.g. > host prefixes, SRv6 locators, or similar. Such filtering is optional and > MAY be controlled via configuration. > > It is also RECOMMENDED that implementations limit the number of UPA > advertisements which can be originated at a given time. > > I assume the reason for this is to ensure that in some pathological cases, > there is not a storm of UPAs or a large number of UPAs being generated. If > we consider access, aggregation, and core layers, then at each progressive > level the propagation involves the UPAs of the lower level of > hierarchy being sent towards the core. In this case, the propagating > ABR/ASBRs are also kind of originating from the UPAs from the lower layer > in its LSAs/LSPs. So, shouldn't the same controls/limits apply at those > routers as well? Perhaps consider tweaking the language in the above text > to cover both origination and propagation? I am not looking for mention of > specific knobs. >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
