[c-nsp] Combining v4 and v6 Route-Maps for BGP Peers

[Devon True]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Oliver,

>> route-map foo permit 10
>>  match ip next-hop foo
>>  match ipv6 next-hop bar
>>
>> Would that match v4 or v6, depending on the address type?
>>
> 
> haven't checked in the lab, but strictly speaking, the above map would
> require both conditions to be met, which is not possible for any given
> prefix ;-) so I doubt this works.

I was able to test it in a lab after I sent the email, and it did not
work. I ended up using the route-map example you show below as a
work-around.

> route-map foo permit 10
>  match ip next-hop foo
> route-map foo permit 20
>  match ipv6 next-hop bar

> However this could become cumbersome, so maybe better use distinct
> route-maps?

I went through an exercise to move all of our peer-groups to
peer-templates since peer-templates can be shared between v4 and v6
neighbors and I could avoid policy/session duplication, so I wanted to
share route-maps too. :) The majority of our route-map statements match
base on community, so I added another match statement for the v6
next-hop and did not have to create duplicate route-maps.

Thanks for your response!

- --
Devon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk1MeH0ACgkQWP2WrBTHBS8uPACeIZy1fLcudXPOxfQe+fzZLElD
mZoAoN0rzn417EjvVFHiImwGedduPUAZ
=2dLq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----