Hello Tore, Hello Sander, Thank you sander for your reply; It already captures the core points well.
In the global routing table: yes In ACLs and IPAM etc: no
It all depends what you are working on :)
Also in the context of NCC IPAM, esp. given current reservation approaches.
IIRC this is about the history of treating multiple sites that are connected on layer-2 as a single end-site. As that has caused confusion in the past, the new text explicitly states that a layer-2 connection does not automatically mean “single end-site”.
This is also correct; In the past, there have been several cases where it was, for example, claimed that three end sites (Amsterdam, Dusseldorf, Berlin) are, effectively, a single end-site, because there is L2 connectivity (which, very likely, goes via an L2VPN anyway). To resolve that discussion/interpretation issue, the proposed changes makes this very much explicit; So, effectively, the change ensures that L2 and L3 VPN connected sites are treated the same, and no longer different. With best regards, Tobias