Am 18.07.2015 um 10:54 schrieb Andrew: > 18.07.2015 00:36, Ondrej Zajicek пишет: >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:20:22AM +0300, Andrew wrote: >>> When routes are deleted (for ex., terminating a lot of PPP tunnels >>> for some >>> reason in same time), it seems like each removed route is sent into >>> separate >>> OSPF packet that causes troubles with OSPF in some cases (for ex., >>> there's >>> troubles with old quagga). >>> >>> Is there a possibility to add some rate-limiting (for ex., limit to 10 >>> messages per second), and aggregate separate 'route deleted' messages >>> to one >>> packet? >> AFAIK, multiple flush LSAs can be packed to one LSA when flushed together >> (i.e. the routes are deleted together), but there is no time-limit. If >> these routes are deleted as separate (but immediate) events, then it is >> possible that the OSPF packet with just one flushed LSA is sent before >> waiting for next route delete (and therefore next flushed LSA. >> > Maybe it'll be good to add some delay (for ex., 10ms) before flush LSA > will be sent? please allow me to quote in this context: Am 08.06.2015 um 13:18 schrieb Ondrej Zajicek: > On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 12:36:07PM +0200, Gruber Gerold wrote: >> please allow me to add the pointer to the also wished "noise >> suppression" in OSPF, where a delay between appearance or disappearance >> of a route and it's propagation to the neighbours would also improve the >> stability of the landscape and lower the "noise" caused by flapping >> routes. (Cisco boxes behave this way, from our observations.) > > Hi > > This is AFAIK fixed in 1.5.0 - LSAs are originated at most once per > MinLSInterval (5 s). >
So if there is a "time trigger" for sending LSAs: should it not be possible to filter (in the sense drop vanish/reappear pairs) or aggregate multiple changes into one LSA message, as Andrew suggests? Best regards Gerold
