<html><head></head><body><div dir="auto">Hi Vincent,<br><br>from what I can assess, you can start with BIRD 2 as the affected parts of the code should be almost untouched.<br><br>The one major exception I see there, is the validation code. If you find out you'd like to do some refactoring there, please consult v3 before.<br><br>After you are done with v2, please also try preparing a merge branch for thread-next. It should not be much work. I'll give you pointers for the things to resolve for v3 after I see your code for v2.<br><br>Hoping that this is OK for you.<br><br>Have a nice weekend! <br>Maria<br><br></div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto">On 26 October 2024 09:15:58 CEST, Vincent Bernat <bernat@luffy.cx> wrote:</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail"><div dir="auto">On 2024-10-26 02:14, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir="auto">I would be interested in implementing BGP Flowspec for VPNv4/VPNv6. Hacking<br>flow4/flow6 to be VPNv4/VPNv6 instead of IPv4/IPv6 instead is easy, but I am<br>unsure of the right way to *add* VPNv4/VPNv6. Should I add flowvpn4/flowvpn6<br>tables or reuse flow4/flow6 and only add "vpn4/vpn6 flow" channels to the<br>BGP protocol?<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br>Hi<br><br>I think you would need to add flowvpn4/flowvpn6 tables and also new<br>net_addr subtypes to lib/net.h, as it is a new route type with a slightly<br>different semantic (specifically RD is a part of the table key). That is<br>mostly a copy-and-paste job from the regular flowspec nettypes.<br><br>Well, alternatively one could add RD to regular net_addr_flowX, keep it<br>zero for regular flowspec with the argument that flowspec NLRI are huge<br>anyways, so unused u64 for RD does not matter. But for the uniformity i<br>would prefer the first approach.<br><br>Different net type leads naturally to different rtables.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br>Thanks. Should I wait for BIRD 3 or it is OK to start on BIRD 2?<br></div></pre></blockquote></div><div dir="auto"><div class='k9mail-signature'>-- <br>Maria Matejka (she/her) | BIRD Team Leader | CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o.</div></div></body></html>