Unfortunately I don’t have the history, we discovered this behavior when doing
some VPNv6 testings a couple of months ago between IOS and Junos. IOS XE does
advertise two nexthops.
From: Robert Raszuk [mailto:rob...@raszuk.net]
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 11:11
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS
Stephane,
Sure you can send two NHs next to each other. But my main question is what
should the receiver of such "thing" do ? Which next hop is more important
to be actually used in forwarding ? Based on what elements such decision is
made ...
If you know some history and can share it here iI
Hi WG,
(Speaking as co-chair)
The current discussion on the NH encodings in our AFI/SAFIs requires some
particular attention.
We would like to take the opportunity of the next IETF to discuss the subject
face to face.
In the meantime, we are looking for few volunteers who will:
- Do
Hi Rajiv,
IMO, I don’t think that “Inferring it from AFI/SAFI per section 3 of RFC4760”
means that there is a format match between the NH field and NLRI, it just says
that there is a relation between the AFI/SAFI and the protocol layer of the NH.
When you know the AFI/SAFI, you can deduce the
Hi Robert,
There are implementations which set two NHs, here is a capture:
Update Message (2), length: 150
Multi-Protocol Reach NLRI (14), length: 100, Flags [O]:
AFI: IPv6 (2), SAFI: labeled VPN Unicast (128)
nexthop: RD: 0:0 (= 0.0.0.0), 2000::162RD: 0:0 (=
