Subject: "third party" next-hop

From: "Sprzaczkowski, Krzysztof" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 18:31:21 +0200

I have a question about 'third party' next-hop in the context of IPv6 routes
sending over IPv4 session. Does 'third party' next-hop make sense in such
situation? Both documents draft-ietf-idr-bgp4-17 (chapter 5.1.3 NEXT_HOP)
and RFC 2858 (chapter 2 Multiprotocol Reachable NLRI - MP_REACH_NLRI) say
that for 'third party' next-hop peer X should share a common subnet with
received next-hop address. According to this, should we compare next-hop
address subnet with peer X address subnet (not with interface's address
subnet where a given peer is established)?

Krzysztof Sprzaczkowski

---

From: Jeffrey Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 13:58:03 -0400

On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 06:31:21PM +0200, Sprzaczkowski, Krzysztof wrote:
> According to this, should we compare next-hop

One could know by configuration what the subnet of the remote side is
for interface/nexthop comparisons.

-- 
Jeff Haas 
NextHop Technologies