Closed suehares closed 1 month ago
Shepherd's question: NLRI specified are: SR Policy IPv4 (1/73) and SR Policy IPv6 (2/73).
Why is the RT target not needed fro IPv6 NLRI (2/73)?
closed merged into https://github.com/ietf-wg-idr/draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi/issues/32
RTG-DIR Issue 24: 4.2.1 Validation of an SR Policy NLRI
Text:/ 4.2.1. Validation of an SR Policy NLRI
When a BGP speaker receives an SR Policy NLRI from a neighbor it MUST first perform validation based on the following rules in addition to the validation described in Section 5:
The SR Policy NLRI MUST include a distinguisher, color, and endpoint field which implies that the length of the NLRI MUST be either 12 or 24 octets (depending on the address family of the endpoint).
The SR Policy update MUST have either the NO_ADVERTISE community or at least one route target extended community in IPv4-address format or both. If a router supporting this specification receives an SR Policy update with no route target extended communities and no NO_ADVERTISE community, the update MUST be considered as malformed./
Jeffrey Question: What about IPv6-address specific RT?
Ketan: It is not defined for use in this document. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/v000LQ8UZWJg-IR2-WnJqaki394/