Hi Nick, Yes you are 100% correct.
The decision to inject any prefix into someone's IGP (or BGP) is a local operator's decision. Btw let me also self correct last note - It is actually pretty trivial to pseudo-random generate ULAs such that blocks of it can actually be aggregatable across areas or levels. It is just that such one time run generation perl or python script will run a little bit longer :) Cheers, R. On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:31 PM Nick Hilliard <n...@foobar.org> wrote: > Robert Raszuk wrote on 02/09/2019 12:09: > > If that is the only concern I think we are done then. The only issue is > > that if you happen to have hierarchical IGP you will not be able to > > summarize them - but I don't think that this would be a showstopper to > > any deployment. > > Robert, > > please correct me if I'm wrong but uSIDs would need to be injected into > the provider's routing tables, so your suggestion that ULAs would be > appropriate for the srv6-usid draft would be contingent on SRv6 > providers being ok about the idea of injecting ULAs into their core. > > I'm not sure that this would necessarily be the case. > > Nick >
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
