Hi Maria, Thanks for your response. (1) Not in the first version to be released, yet if there is enough demand, why not. What is your usecase, please?
My use case is to exchange IPv4 prefix through BGP EVPN
(2) This has quite some consequences we are avoiding by enforcing the one-level rule, thus if there is demand, we may add it in some higher version of BIRD 3 probably. The major problem is thorough testing to identify the corner cases where the multi-level resolution may start to do weird things after specifically timed colliding updates.
Please let me know if you have any workaround to overcome this two level lookup issue.
Thanks, Ramanathan On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 at 12:17, Maria Matejka <maria.matejka@nic.cz> wrote:
Hello!
On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 10:49:32AM +0530, Ramanathan Selvamani wrote:
I would like to know about the below two things in BIRD support
1. Do you have any plan to support BGP EVPN Route-Type 5 (IP Prefix Route) as defined in RFC 9136 in the BIRD EVPN branch.
Not in the first version to be released, yet if there is enough demand, why not. What is your usecase, please?
2. Do you have any plan to support two level recursive lookup to resolve nexthop for BGP routes. I mean the below comment in “rt_update_hostentry” function /* Recursive route should not depend on another recursive route */
This has quite some consequences we are avoiding by enforcing the one-level rule, thus if there is demand, we may add it in some higher version of BIRD 3 probably. The major problem is thorough testing to identify the corner cases where the multi-level resolution may start to do weird things after specifically timed colliding updates.
Have a nice day! Maria
– Maria Matejka (she/her) | BIRD Team Leader | CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o.