[j-nsp] Re: route-filter ... longer: not working?

[Daniel Roesen]

On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 09:54:34PM +0200, Sebastian Abt wrote:
> 2002::/16 is evaluated *only* against the "route-filter 2002::/16
> longer" entry (which neither accepts, nor rejects 2002::/16, thus your
> prefix is probably rejected elsewhere) due to the "longest-match lookup"
> and not against "route-filter 0::/0 upto /48 next policy".
> 
> At least that's my understanding of how route-filter statements work.

Thanks, you are obviously 100% correct.

          route-filter 2002::/16 longer;

needs to be replaced by:

          route-filter 2002::/16 exact next policy;
          route-filter 2002::/16 longer;


Best regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0