On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 08:48:48PM +0100, Pavlos Parissis wrote: > On 24/02/2017 04:12 μμ, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: > > I would suggest to decrease min rx/tx interval to 100 ms (to see if that > > helps). > > If the hypothesis holds true, that is Bird blocks for 1.2secs, then sending > BFD > messages at higher rate wont help. Do you think so ?
I was imprecise here. I meant decrease of min rx/tx interval with appropriate increase of multiplier. It would not help if the hypothesis is true, but it may help if there are some other causes. > I could try the opposite, configure the upstream router to declare the BFD > down > only after hasn't seen a BFD message for a period of 5seconds. Note that multiplier configured on each side is propagated to the other side where it is used to compute timeout for received BFD messages. So if you want the upstream router not to declare the BFD down too early, you would need to configure multiplier on the BIRD router, not on the upstream router. But in practice you would probably want to set both values, as possible blocking for several seconds could produce session failure in both directions (as the blocked router could process 'timeout' event even before it processes queued received BFD messages), -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santi...@crfreenet.org) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
