a crude method of limiting long-prefix propagation

[john heasley]

Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 08:50:06AM -0500, Joe Abley:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:54:41AM -0800, john heasley wrote:
> > Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 03:05:56AM -0500, Joe Abley:
> > > Ah, I sent that out slightly prematurely:
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 02:30:17AM -0500, Joe Abley wrote:
> > > > 3.2 Towards the Other Edge
> > > > 
> > > >    ASes which support this convention must include additional clauses in
> > > >    their advertisement policy to all neighbour ASes, as follows:
> > > > 
> > > >    o  When announcing prefixes to AS A: if the community attributes
> > > >       EPPC_ALLOW:0 and EPPC_ALLOW:A are both present, then delete the
> > > >       EPPC_ALLOW:A community, and then advertise the prefix.
> > > 
> > > In fact, I don't think there is any need to delete the :A community
> > 
> > then there really isnt a need for the :0 communities by matching EPPC_ALLOW:*.
> 
> That's true -- however, I wasn't sure how widely a match for N:* was
> supported (I hear you can do it on ciscos and junipers though). If
> there are routers that can't match a wildcard community string, the
> :0 value would allow more widespread support.

probably, exists...3com, bay, ...  does gated have support?

> Is this a non-issue?

imo, no.

> 
> Joe