nanog mailing list archives
RE: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange
From: Lane Patterson <lpatterson () equinix com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:59:38 -0800
Hmm, I know there are a lot of overburdened BR's out there, but since this is set on a per-neighbor basis, there should at least be room for some selective optimization. It seems a bit crazy to think that each time there's a BR maintenance/reboot at an IXP, peers will continue to send to the bit bucket in the sky for 180+ seconds.
-----Original Message----- From: Deepak Jain [mailto:deepak () ai net] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 11:48 AM To: Lane Patterson Cc: 'nanog () merit edu' Subject: RE: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange The problem I have seen with setting BGP timeouts that low is when peering with overloaded or slow/old routers. Often they will "pause" their BGP activity while they are actively peering or repeering across their internal or external network. The low times will then cause more timeouts before the fabric has stablized. Deepak Jain AiNET On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, Lane Patterson wrote:Hmm, many folks didn't seem to understand the context here. fast-external-fallover doesn't apply if a peer BR across a GigE exchange dies...you've still got link on your Gig port, so there is no link level indication of failure. tweaking tcp timers is not the right approach...BGP explicitly has a keepalive for this exact purpose, when peering dies but your interface stays up. the best non-radical suggestion so far is to simply tweak your keepalive to 10 and holdtime to 30 seconds, to bring this in line with the granularity of direct-connected peer interface orIGP metrics.Do people do this? Do people have problems doing this? Do any folks do less than this on their eBGP peers, and at what tradeoff expense. This is the old issue of finding the right operationally sane timeouts, not too high, not too low. The defaults clearly seem too high, yet I haven't seen many cases where folks set these down :-) Cheers, -Lane-----Original Message----- From: Lane Patterson [mailto:lpatterson () equinix com] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 10:08 PM To: 'nanog () merit edu' Subject: FW: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange I am looking for operational BCP feedback on common practice for tweaking down BGP holdtime/keepalive across GigE exchange points,since a peercould go down on the other side of the GigE switch without a corresponding adjacency change seen on your BR. The thought is to make down peers known as fast thru a GigE exchange asthey wouldbe over a POS private peer interface. The current defaults are pretty gross, and much worse than the ISIS hello and interface keepalive defaults of 10 seconds. IOS12.x: neighbor [ip-address | peer-group-name] timers keepalive holdtime holdtime: default 180 seconds keepalive: default 60 seconds http://cco.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios12 1/121cgcr/ip_r /iprprt2/1rdbgp.htm#xtocid8553 JunOS 4.2: holdtime: default 90 seconds keepalive: default one third of holdtime https://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos42/swconfig-rou ting42/html/bg p-summary13.html#1015669 Cheers, -Lane Lane Patterson <lane () equinix com> Equinix, Inc.
Current thread:
- FW: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Lane Patterson (Feb 24)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Martin Taylor (Feb 24)
- RE: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Lane Patterson (Feb 24)
- RE: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Deepak Jain (Feb 24)
- RE: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Lane Patterson (Feb 24)
- RE: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Deepak Jain (Feb 24)
- Re: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Clayton Fiske (Feb 24)
- Re: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Ryan O'Connell (Feb 24)
- Re: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Clayton Fiske (Feb 24)
- RE: BGP keepalive/holdtime at GigE exchange Deepak Jain (Feb 24)