On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 9:26 AM Jay Borkenhagen <
jayb@att.com> wrote:
Thanks for the update, but based on that description I'm not certain
that you implemented the same thing that pmacct built, which IMO is
what is needed by those considering deploying a drop-invalids policy.
(Perhaps you omitted mentioning that ability in your description but
included it in your implementation.)
Thanks Jay, you are correct. As we were talking through the logic we realized we missed that bit. Internally, we're working though the logic to understand if there is a covering route, is that route valid, and if not, will we recurse and look for another covering route that is valid?
Either way, we'll be updating our software with that functionality shortly.
-Steve