Subject: Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] rtg-cfg hierachy (PLEASE REPLY TO THIS ONE WITH THE CORRECT MAIL ALIASES)

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 18:31:20 +0000

Hi Lada, Thomas, 

On 2/13/15, 5:10 AM, "Ladislav Lhotka" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>"Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]> writes:
>
>>Hi Thomas, 
>>
>>It is my understanding that the RIBs were moved out of the
>>routing-instance in response to your comment that a RIB would need to be
>>attached to multiple routing instances. I don¹t agree with this
>>model. I
>
>Acee refers to this comment that Thomas made in his review of
>draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-02 on 2012-03-23:
>
>"Allowing multiple "routers" is a good starting point for using these
>specs in the context of RFC4364 (MPLS/BGP IP VPNs). However, if I
>understand correctly Yang syntax, the way the filters are defined would
>not work in the context of RFC4364, where a BGP routing instance in the
>master "router" exports selected routes in each of the routing table of
>each VPN (VRF).  The VRF also export routes to the master instance."
>
>And indeed, in rev. -03 the list of RIBs (then called "routing-table")
>was the moved out of the routing instance (then called "router") and
>became global.

Then do you agree to move the RIBs back into the routing-instance? Both
the BGP YANG drafts model L3VPN definitions under the corresponding
address family in BGP.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shaikh-idr-bgp-model-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-zhdankin-idr-bgp-cfg-00.txt

Thanks,
Acee 

>
>Lada
>
>>believe that a routing instance implies a VRF, virtual router or
>>something
>>in between and that a RIB should be associated with one and only one
>>routing instance. Additionally, I feel that RIBs are basically passive
>>entities with respect to import/export of routes between RIBs in the
>>same
>>or other routing-instances. Rather, all import/export is under the
>>control
>>of a routing-protocol. For example, this would be handled by a BGP
>>routing-protocol instance for L3VPNs.
>>
>>I¹d like to get the opinions of others on this fundamental aspect of the
>>rtg-cfg model. 
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Acee 
>>
>>
>
>-- 
>Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
>PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C