Re: Persistent BGP peer flapping - do you care?

[Susan Hares <skh () nexthop com>]

Dave:

The state machine + option in MIB can make this option workable
via the specification.   It is important to let user decide on
a peer basis what is worse.

Thank you very much for this input.  Your input makes
the next choices for the BGP spec easier.

Thanks again!!

Sue Hares

At 05:34 PM 1/17/2002 -0500, Dave Israel wrote:

> On 1/17/2002 at 14:21:59 -0800, Jake Khuon said:
>
> > As for propogation of the bad prefix... well that soapbox has worn paint on
> > top.  If people aren't going to bother following specs in the first place
> > I'm not sure a new spec will solve anything.
>
> It's a question of robustness; if the new spec includes a way to be
> tolerant of how the spec is (or can be) commonly abused, then the
> followers of the spec will not be at the mercy of those who deviate.
>
> In this case, I think that having the option to keep a session that
> gives bad routes up, and just dropping the route, is a good answer.
> That would allow the user to determine which is preferable for a given
> peer: possible corruption or certain disconnection.
>
> -Dave