Re: Maximum Prefix Limit

Enke Chen <enke@redback.com> Wed, 16 January 2002 05:58 UTC

To: Manav Bhatia <mnvbhatia@yahoo.com>
Cc: idr@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Maximum Prefix Limit
In-Reply-To: Message from "Manav Bhatia" <mnvbhatia@yahoo.com> of "Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:22:14 +0530." <03f701c19e51$f2d4daa0$b4036c6b@Manav>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 21:57:40 -0800
From: Enke Chen <enke@redback.com>
Message-Id: <20020116055740.E11A27E6C1@popserv3.redback.com>
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk

Manav,

> Message-ID: <03f701c19e51$f2d4daa0$b4036c6b@Manav>
> Reply-To: "Manav Bhatia" <mnvbhatia@yahoo.com>
> From: "Manav Bhatia" <mnvbhatia@yahoo.com>
> To: "Enke Chen" <enke@redback.com>
> Cc: <idr@merit.edu>
> References: <20020116053731.DC01615D3C1@popserv1.redback.com>
> Subject: Re: Maximum Prefix Limit 
> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:22:14 +0530
> 
> Thanks Enke!
> 
> One more thing - Should we restart the session after the Idle timer expires
> or should the session be freezed until a BGP Restart is given?

That is an implementation decision you need to make. -- Enke

> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Enke Chen" <enke@redback.com>
> To: "Manav Bhatia" <mnvbhatia@yahoo.com>
> Cc: <idr@merit.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 11:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Maximum Prefix Limit
> 
> 
> | Hi, Manav:
> | Regarding the CEASE subcode, please see the following draft:
> |
> |        draft-ietf-idr-cease-subcode-00.txt
> |
> | -- Enke
> |
> | > Message-ID: <03b001c19e4e$aa86e750$b4036c6b@Manav>
> | > Reply-To: "Manav Bhatia" <mnvbhatia@yahoo.com>
> | > From: "Manav Bhatia" <mnvbhatia@yahoo.com>
> | > To: <idr@merit.edu>
> | > Subject: Maximum Prefix Limit
> | > Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:58:43 +0530
> | > MIME-Version: 1.0
> | >
> | > Hi,
> | >
> | > I am working on BGP implementation of the "maximum prefix limit"
> feature
> | > which is like a protection mechanism against route leaking. A warning
> flag
> | > will be raised once the number of prefixes start exceeding some
> percentage
> | > for the user to do something about it. If nothing happens and the limit
> | > reaches a configured threshold then the BGP session will be torn down.
> | >
> | > - In the current draft there is no mechanism for the other end to know
> of
> | > the reason why the session went down in the first place. IF this is
> | > achieved then the admin at the other end can take some actions to
> alleviate
> | > the situation.
> | >
> | > - Should  the BGP session be restarted after some configured Idle Timer
> | > expiration?
> | >
> | > This can result in consistent route flappings which is highly
> undesirable.
> | >
> | > - Should the BGP session be freezed until a manual Restart is given?
> | >
> | > - Should there be counters for individual SAFI or should there be a
> | > consolidated one for the entire AFI?
> | >
> | > We must have a mechanism wherein we can inform admin guys in the
> network
> | > leaking routes causing an overflow for us. This issue was brought up
> some
> | > time back in the list but i saw no apparent conclusion to the whole
> | > discussion ;-)
> | >
> | > Is there any intention of introducing a new cease sub-code in the
> | > NOTIFICATION message which will inform both the parties of the reason
> why
> | > the session was brought down!
> | >
> | > Regards,
> | > Manav
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | > ----
> | > "When you are courting a nice girl an hour seems like a second. When
> you
> | > sit on a red-hot cinder a second seems like an hour. That's
> relativity."
> | >
> | > -Albert Einstein, on relativity
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | > _________________________________________________________
> | > Do You Yahoo!?
> | > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> | >
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>