IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] BGP Auto discovery - L2 liveliness??

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Fri, 20 July 2018 17:25 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6424313102A for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 10:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sbg4L3XnKf5x for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 10:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B72D5130F74 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 10:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1fgZA2-0005MH-2C; Fri, 20 Jul 2018 17:25:46 +0000
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 13:25:45 -0400
Message-ID: <m26019hl9i.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
Cc: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <FB71D237-679F-4688-BD45-8B2349E2CC05@cisco.com>
References: <E461FEB2-11DF-4256-B701-5CD854C5378B@cisco.com> <FB71D237-679F-4688-BD45-8B2349E2CC05@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/25.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/H5us-y0fLL5cGGYLhKd_pqoc3Yw>
Subject: Re: [Idr] BGP Auto discovery - L2 liveliness??
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 17:25:49 -0000

>     Could someone please explain - How is L2 liveliness important for
>     auto-discovery between 2 directly connected BGP neighbors
>     (referring to the topology shown yesterday)? Or is it really meant
>     to benefit the peering relationship (once established) - bring
>     down the peer if L2 fails or vice versa?

while i imagine it could be used for other things, bringing down L3
sesiosn when L2 goes down would seem a good idea.

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email