<div dir="ltr">I'm not sure if that is the motivation on Bird...<br><br>But I think it could be related the fact that the protocolo that is used to transport BGP Sessions does not defines protocols of the routes that are being exchanged.<br>You cloud use a BGP session in v6 to exchange v6 routes, v4 routes or even both.<br>The same is true if you are using a BGP session over v4.<br><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Em ter., 21 de set. de 2021 às 10:26, Robert Sander <<a href="mailto:r.sander@heinlein-support.de">r.sander@heinlein-support.de</a>> escreveu:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<br>
why is it not possible to define BGP sessions like this?<br>
<br>
protocol bgp g60 {<br>
local as 64501;<br>
neighbor as 64499;<br>
ipv4 {<br>
import all;<br>
export all;<br>
};<br>
local 192.0.2.4;<br>
neighbor 192.0.2.5;<br>
};<br>
ipv6 {<br>
import all;<br>
export all;<br>
local 2001:db8::4;<br>
neighbor 2001:db8::5;<br>
};<br>
};<br>
<br>
It seems still necessary to write two bgp definitions separately for <br>
IPv4 and IPv6 repeating the AS numbers and name.<br>
<br>
I see no benefit from the Bird 1.6 notation here.<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
-- <br>
Robert Sander<br>
Heinlein Consulting GmbH<br>
Schwedter Str. 8/9b, 10119 Berlin<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.heinlein-support.de" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.heinlein-support.de</a><br>
<br>
Tel: 030 / 405051-43<br>
Fax: 030 / 405051-19<br>
<br>
Zwangsangaben lt. §35a GmbHG:<br>
HRB 220009 B / Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg,<br>
Geschäftsführer: Peer Heinlein -- Sitz: Berlin<br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Douglas Fernando Fischer<br>Engº de Controle e Automação<br><div style="padding:0px;margin-left:0px;margin-top:0px;overflow:hidden;color:black;text-align:left;line-height:130%;font-family:"courier new",monospace"></div></div></div>