Re: [Idr] draft-merciaz-idr-bgp-bfd-strict-mode

Hi Susan,

Yes, I support the draft as is.

The change I am suggesting is very minor - we can follow it up after
adoption.

Thank you.

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019, 4:21 PM Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

> Albert:
>
>
>
> To clarify, do you support WG adoption with the draft as is.
>
>
>
> As a WG chair, I have to trust that all  drafts are improved during the WG
> process.  Can this small change be made after adoption or should it be made
> before the draft is considered for adoption.
>
>
>
> Sue Hares
>
>
>
> *From:* Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Albert Fu
> (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK)
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 25, 2019 4:19 PM
> *To:* idr@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [Idr] draft-merciaz-idr-bgp-bfd-strict-mode
>
>
>
> I am in support of this draft, and would like to request a small change to
> make this draft more operationally useful.
>
> We have encountered several traffic blackhole problems in our production
> network without this feature. As such, we have deployed BGP with strict BFD
> mode on a proprietary vendor implementation for a while.
>
> Since a lot of MetroE circuit failures occur with interfaces still up, ie.
> break in the middle issues, the traditional knobs like interface
> hold-time/debounce timer can not be used to dampen interface flaps.
>
>
> We have observed that interface issues tend to occur in bursts and would
> like to request that an option be added in "Section 4 Operation:" to delay
> BGP from coming up until BFD is proven stable continuously for a period of
> time (i.e. BFD hold up feature).
>
>
> This is a feature that we are currently using in the proprietary vendor
> deployment. In our case, since we have multiple redundant paths, we have
> some links where we delay BGP from coming up until BFD has been stable
> continuously for 60 seconds.
>
> Thanks
> Albert Fu
> Bloomberg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>