Re: endpoint liveness (RE: Do ATM-based Exchange Points make sense an ymore?)

[Vadim Antonov <avg () exigengroup com>]

It makes little sense to detect transient glitches.  Any possible reaction 
on those glitches (i.e. withdrawal of exterior routes with subsequent 
reinstatement) is more damaging than the glitches themselves.

--vadim

On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Lane Patterson wrote:

> BGP keepalive/hold timers are configurable even down to granularity 
> of link or PVC level keepalives, but for session stability reasons, 
> it appears that most ISPs at GigE exchanges choose not to
> tweak them down from the defaults.  IIRC, Juniper is 30/90 and Cisco is
> 60/180.  My gut feel was that even something like 10/30 would be 
> reasonable, but nobody seems compelled that this is much of an
> issue.
>
> Cheers,
> -Lane
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Petri Helenius [mailto:pete () he iki fi]
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 3:07 PM
> To: Mikael Abrahamsson; nanog () merit edu
> Subject: Re: Do ATM-based Exchange Points make sense anymore?
>
>
>
>
> > What functionality does PVC give you that the ethernet VLAN does not?
> That╢s quite easy. Endpoint liveness. A IPv4 host on a VLAN has no idea
> if the guy on the "other end" died until the BGP timer expires.
>
> FR has LMI, ATM has OAM. (and ILMI)
>
> Pete