I would argue that this is just an unintended side effect of the
original implementation. Shuffling interface vif's seems like a good
way to churn a significant number of mroutes to me. If you want to
use a interface it probably is going to be already be configured with
it's own vif, and as such
On 11/06/17 11:55, Yotam Gigi wrote:
> I have been looking into some weird behavior, and I am not sure whether it is
> a bug or a feature.
>
> When a VIF with index v gets deleted, the MFC routes does not get updated,
> which
> means that there can be routes pointing to that VIF. On datapath, whe
I have been looking into some weird behavior, and I am not sure whether it is
a bug or a feature.
When a VIF with index v gets deleted, the MFC routes does not get updated, which
means that there can be routes pointing to that VIF. On datapath, when packet
hits that route, the VIF validity will be
