%% You should probably cite rfc8950 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-bess-rfc5549revision-05, number = {draft-ietf-bess-rfc5549revision-05}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-rfc5549revision/05/}, author = {Stephane Litkowski and Swadesh Agrawal and Krishnaswamy Ananthamurthy and Keyur Patel}, title = {{Advertising IPv4 Network Layer Reachability Information with an IPv6 Next Hop}}, pagetotal = 14, year = , month = , day = , abstract = {Multiprotocol BGP (MP-BGP) specifies that the set of usable next-hop address families is determined by the Address Family Identifier (AFI) and the Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI). The AFI/SAFI definitions for the IPv4 address family only have provisions for advertising a Next Hop address that belongs to the IPv4 protocol when advertising IPv4 Network Layer Reachability Information (NLRI) or VPN-IPv4 NLRI. This document specifies the extensions necessary to allow advertising IPv4 NLRI or VPN-IPv4 NLRI with a Next Hop address that belongs to the IPv6 protocol. This comprises an extension of the AFI/SAFI definitions to allow the address of the Next Hop for IPv4 NLRI or VPN-IPv4 NLRI to also belong to the IPv6 protocol, the encoding of the Next Hop to determine which of the protocols the address actually belongs to, and a BGP Capability allowing MP-BGP Peers to dynamically discover whether they can exchange IPv4 NLRI and VPN-IPv4 NLRI with an IPv6 Next Hop. This document obsoletes RFC5549.}, }