Which of the following is NOT a valid option to steer traffic into a flex-algo segment-routing tunnel?
A.
Using a flex-algo Node-SID as an explicit hop in the path definition of an SR-TE LSP and enabling the sr-te tunnel type for a VPN service.
B.
Specifying the flex-algo instance ID as an additional TE constraint for an SR-TE LSP and enabling the sr-te tunnel type for a VPN service.
C.
Configuring and applying a VRF import policy to a VPRN service and enabling the sr-is-is or sr-ospf tunnel type for the service, depending on the underlying routing protocol.
D.
Configuring and applying a VSI import policy to an EVPN service and enabling the sr-is-is or sr-ospf tunnel type for the service, depending on the underlying routing protocol.
B is correct as you cannot specify a flex-algo instance ID under a SR-TE LSP. The other answers are valid methods of steering a service to a flex-algo.
A voting comment increases the vote count for the chosen answer by one.
Upvoting a comment with a selected answer will also increase the vote count towards that answer by one.
So if you see a comment that you already agree with, you can upvote it instead of posting a new comment.
Michanis
6 months, 2 weeks agonawaf702
6 months, 2 weeks agonawaf702
6 months, 2 weeks agohazemsalah87
8 months, 4 weeks ago