Re: VRFs and the scalability of namespaces
From: Sowmini Varadhan <hidden>
Date: 2014-09-29 16:50:42
From: Sowmini Varadhan <hidden>
Date: 2014-09-29 16:50:42
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Ben Greear [off-list ref] wrote:
On 09/29/2014 06:06 AM, David Ahern wrote:
We have implemented support for at least most of this (excepting duplicate IPs) using routing tables, rules, and (optionally, xorp as the router).
My undertanding of multiple routing-tables/rules was that they are closer in semantics to switch/router ACLs than to VRFs, eg., one big difference is that an interface can belong to exactly one VRF at a time, which is not mandated by multiple routing-tables/rules. Was I mistaken? --Sowmini