RE: rfd

2018-12-27 Thread adamv0025
> 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 tha

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Michael Still
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

RE: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Naslund, Steve
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

RE: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Naslund, Steve
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

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Job Snijders
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

RE: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Naslund, Steve
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

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Mark Tinka
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

RE: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Scott Weeks
--- 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

RE: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Naslund, Steve
you have processed this unstable route and burned your CPU cycles, I am now giving you to option not to install it into your tableā€. Remember also that we are only talking about default behavior here. You always have the option to override it by changing timer, penalties, or shutting down RFD

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Job Snijders
over a stable link. In that case you would be doing a dis-service by > not withdrawing that route and having a local-pref does not help since you > don't necessarily have visibility to all of your customers other carrier > networks. > > You do have the ability to clear the RF

RE: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Naslund, Steve
s not help since you don't necessarily have visibility to all of your customers other carrier networks. You do have the ability to clear the RFD timers for a route if you need to manually intervene for example when you know for a fact that you fixed the problem. That means that if no one is wa

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Jared Mauch
> 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

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Saku Ytti
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

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Mark Tinka
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.

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Mark Tinka
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.

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Andrew Latham
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 -

Re: rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Job Snijders
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/po

rfd

2018-12-18 Thread Randy Bush
do you have rfd on? with what parms? randy