nanog mailing list archives
RE: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers
From: Jensen Tyler <JTyler () fiberutilities com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:42:39 -0500
Correct me if I am wrong but to detect a failure by default BGP would wait the "hold-timer" then declare a peer dead and converge. So you would be looking at 90 seconds(juniper default?) + CPU bound convergence time to recover? Am I thinking about this right? -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Wheeler [mailto:jsw () inconcepts biz] Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 1:55 PM To: nanog () nanog org Subject: Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Jensen Tyler <JTyler () fiberutilities com> wrote:
We have many switches between us and Level3 so we don't get a "interface down" to drop the session in the event of a failure.
This is often my topology as well. I am satisfied with BGP's mechanism and default timers, and have been for many years. The reason for this is quite simple: failures are relatively rare, my convergence time to a good state is largely bounded by CPU, and I do not consider a slightly improved convergence time to be worth an a-typical configuration. Case in point, Richard says that none of his customers have requested such configuration to date; and you indicate that Level3 will provision BFD only if you use a certain vendor and this is handled outside of their normal provisioning process. For an IXP LAN interface and associated BGP neighbors, I see much more advantage. I imagine this will become common practice for IXP peering sessions long before it is typical to use BFD on customer/transit-provider BGP sessions. -- Jeff S Wheeler <jsw () inconcepts biz> Sr Network Operator / Innovative Network Concepts
Current thread:
- bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Tassos Chatzithomaoglou (Mar 16)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Richard A Steenbergen (Mar 16)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Tassos Chatzithomaoglou (Mar 16)
- RE: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Jensen Tyler (Mar 16)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Jeff Wheeler (Mar 16)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Richard A Steenbergen (Mar 16)
- RE: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Jensen Tyler (Mar 16)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Jeff Wheeler (Mar 16)
- Simple Low Cost WAN Link Simulator Recommendations Loopback (Mar 17)
- Re: Simple Low Cost WAN Link Simulator Recommendations Sergey Voropaev (Mar 17)
- Simple Low Cost WAN Link Simulator Recommendations Loopback (Mar 17)
- Re: Simple Low Cost WAN Link Simulator Recommendations Mike Callagy (Mar 18)
- Re: Simple Low Cost WAN Link Simulator Recommendations Matthew Petach (Mar 20)
- Re: Simple Low Cost WAN Link Simulator Recommendations Tim Durack (Mar 20)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Tassos Chatzithomaoglou (Mar 16)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Richard A Steenbergen (Mar 16)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Sudeep Khuraijam (Mar 16)
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Jeff Wheeler (Mar 16)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: bfd-like mechanism for LANPHY connections between providers Sudeep Khuraijam (Mar 16)