nanog mailing list archives
Re: v6 deagg
From: Sander Steffann <sander () steffann nl>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 19:16:51 +0100
Hi Bill,
I don't fully understand the math yet but the algorithm doesn't smell right. As near as I can figure it may only be correct in a static system. If after convergence the disaggregate ceases to be reachable from the aggregate, there doesn't appear to be either enough information in the system or enough triggers traveling between routers for it to reconverge to a correct state.
If a network announces an aggregate when they can't reach all more-specifics then things will already be broken. Don't announce address space that you can't handle traffic for... But true: without Dragon the more specific would still arrive via another path and it would still be reachable. Cheers, Sander
Current thread:
- Re: v6 deagg, (continued)
- Re: v6 deagg Saku Ytti (Feb 20)
- Re: v6 deagg Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 20)
- Re: v6 deagg Nikolay Shopik (Feb 20)
- Re: v6 deagg Jack Bates (Feb 20)
- Re: v6 deagg Måns Nilsson (Feb 21)
- Re: v6 deagg Sander Steffann (Feb 21)
- Re: v6 deagg Måns Nilsson (Feb 21)
- Re: v6 deagg Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 20)
- Re: v6 deagg Saku Ytti (Feb 20)
- Re: v6 deagg Randy Bush (Feb 23)
- Re: v6 deagg William Herrin (Feb 23)
- Re: v6 deagg Sander Steffann (Feb 24)
- Re: v6 deagg William Herrin (Feb 24)
- Re: v6 deagg Jack Bates (Feb 26)