Subject: [bess] per VRF RD vs per address family RD

From: Qin Wu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 18:23:10 +0000

Hi, Folks:

RFC4659 said:

"

   When a site is IPv4 capable and IPv6 capable, the same RD MAY be used
   for the advertisement of IPv6 addresses and IPv4 addresses.
   Alternatively, a different RD MAY be used for the advertisement of
   the IPv4 addresses and of the IPv6 addresses.

"

But in BESS L3VPN YANG data model, onely same RD for the advertisement of IPv6 address and IPv4 address is supported, see the following model structure snippet:

  augment /ni:network-instances/ni:network-instance/ni:ni-type:
    +--:(l3vpn)
       +--rw l3vpn
          +--rw rd?        bgp-rd-type
          +--ro auto-rd?   rt-types:route-distinguisher
          +--rw ipv4
          |  +--rw unicast
          |     +--rw vpn-targets

I am wondering why per address family RD is not supported ,i..e, different RD for advertisment of the IPv4 addresses and of the IPv6 address.

If this is something that have been discussed, please point me the link , thanks for clarification.

-Qin

---

From: "Susan Hares" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:39:35 -0400

Qin:

Please compare the BESS L3VPN Yang data model with the base BGP model
handling of AFI/SAFI. 

Sue 

From: BESS [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Qin Wu
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 2:23 PM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: [bess] per VRF RD vs per address family RD

Hi, Folks:

RFC4659 said:

"

"

But in BESS L3VPN YANG data model, onely same RD for the advertisement of
IPv6 address and IPv4 address is supported, see the following model
structure snippet:

I am wondering why per address family RD is not supported ,i..e, different
RD for advertisment of the IPv4 addresses and of the IPv6 address.

If this is something that have been discussed, please point me the link ,
thanks for clarification.

-Qin