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

[chip]

+1 for separate sets of route-maps

--chip

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Gert Doering <gert at greenie.muc.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 10:20:00PM +0100, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:
>> > 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 seem to remember I have done something like that, and got bitten
> hard - because it's the other way round: applied to IPv6 BGP, the
> "match ip ..." stuff is just not evaluated, and vice versa.
>
> (My map was wrong, and I had a match clause for the wrong protocol
> in there, and so *all* prefixes got matched)
>
>
> In any case, we have deciced to have distinct route-maps for now, and
> get rid of IPv4 as soon as possible... :-)
>
> gert
>
> --
> USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
>                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
> fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>



-- 
Just my $.02, your mileage may vary,  batteries not included, etc....