Hi,

The PIM protocol isn't available inside of a VRF.

Expected behavior:

protocols pim is available inside the vrf name example_vrf configuration subtree.

Sanity checks should be implemented to fail the commit if:

• One attempts to add, inside a VRF, an interface which is not a member of the current VRF being considered.
• One attempts to add an interface that is member of a VRF from the main protocols pim subtree.

I'm not sure what your policy on the matter is, but if considered relevant, it would be nice to raise a non-fatal warning if ones refers, from a VRF subtree, to a rendezvous point address that is worn by an interface that is not member of the same VRF. Reciprocally, a non-fatal warning should be thrown when attempting to refer, in the main protocols pim subtree, to a RP address that is worn by an interface which is member of a VRF (once again, not a blocker if not implemented).

Additionally, the following command subset is required to access the infos for that instance of pimd: show ip pim vrf example_vrf [...].

Best regards,