> Randy Bush
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 5:40 PM
>
> do you have rfd on? with what parms?
>
> randy
If I remember correctly the industry was back and forth on this several
times now.
First it was deemed good then some studies came out proving the penalty is
worse than the crime couple ye
In general I agree with the idea here but I would also be interested in the
possibility of running the local route policy engine against routes that
are locally detected to meet a damping condition (user configureable of
course). This would potentially yield the ability to change local_pref as
well
I will grant you that no customer ever asked for route dampening. I also
realize that RFD is much less important now than in the past. I come from the
ARPANET/DDN ages of the Internet and can tell you that RFD was absolutely
critical in the days of very under powered routers and very unstable
I think you will find that very hard to evaluate since the value of RFD will be
different in different network regions. For example, it is probably good
practice to run RFD toward a customer on an unstable access link. It might not
be a good idea to run it on a major backbone link that could p
Dear Steve,
No worries, I have not forgotten the transitive properties of the
LOCAL_PREF BGP Path Attribute! :-) You are right that any LOCAL_PREF
modifications (and the attribute itself), are local to the Autonomous
System in which they were set, but the effects of such settings can
percolate fur
It is an interesting article but confirms a few things to me.
1. There are only a very small percentage of flapping routes causing an
inordinate amount of BGP processing. Would it be more effective to implement
this route damping mechanism world wide or try to eliminate the source of the
in
What would really be of interest to me would be for those that run RFD
to measure its impact to their network (positive or otherwise) so we
have something scientific to base on.
The theory (and practice of old) tells us that RFD is either very good,
or very bad. There are probably more folk that h
--- snasl...@medline.com wrote:
From: "Naslund, Steve"
Mainly because propagating a flapping route across
the entire Internet is damaging...
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220850232_Route_Flap_Damping_Made_Usable
scott
Remember always that the local pref is just that, YOUR local preference.
Sending that flapping route upstream does not give your peer the option to
ignore it. In any case, the downside is that you have to process that route
and then choose whether or not to use it. It’s like saying “now that
Hi Steve,
Lowering the LP would achieve the outcome you desire, provided there are
(stable) alternative paths.
What you advocate results in absolute outages in what may already be
precarious situations (natural disasters?) - what Saku Ytti suggests like a
less painful alternative with desirable p
Mainly because propagating a flapping route across the entire Internet is
damaging to performance of things other your own equipment and that of your
customer. It is just "bad manners" to propagate a flapping route to your peers
and it helps maintain a minimum level of stability that it require
> On Dec 18, 2018, at 1:45 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
>
> On 18/Dec/18 19:40, Randy Bush wrote:
>
>> do you have rfd on? with what parms?
>
> We don't do it (SEACOM, AS37100).
Similarly 20940 does not use it. I find it hard to see a case where we would
turn it on.
- jared
I always wondered why does it have to be so binary.
I don't want to decide for my customers if partial visibility is
better than busy CPU, but I do appreciate stability. Why can't we have
local-pref penalty for flapping route. If it's only option, keep
offering it, if there are other, more stable
On 18/Dec/18 19:40, Randy Bush wrote:
> do you have rfd on? with what parms?
We don't do it (SEACOM, AS37100).
Mark.
On 18/Dec/18 19:40, Randy Bush wrote:
> do you have rfd on? with what parms?
We don't do it (SEACOM, AS37100).
Mark.
Route Flap Damping via https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2439 for everyone.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 11:42 AM Randy Bush wrote:
> do you have rfd on? with what parms?
>
> randy
>
--
- Andrew "lathama" Latham -
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:40 PM Randy Bush wrote:
>
> do you have rfd on? with what parms?
I assume rfd in this context means "Route Flap Dampening".
NTT / AS 2914 does *not* have Route Flap Dampening configured, as is
documented here
https://us.ntt.net/support/policy/routing.cfm#routedampening
17 matches
Mail list logo
