Re: Maximum Prefix Limit

Vincent Gillet <vgi@zoreil.com> Wed, 16 January 2002 15:33 UTC

Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:31:27 +0100
From: Vincent Gillet <vgi@zoreil.com>
To: Manav Bhatia <mnvbhatia@yahoo.com>
Cc: idr@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Maximum Prefix Limit
Message-ID: <20020116153127.GE1786@opentransit.net>
References: <03b001c19e4e$aa86e750$b4036c6b@Manav>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <03b001c19e4e$aa86e750$b4036c6b@Manav>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.24i
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk

mnvbhatia@yahoo.com disait :

> Hi,
> 
> - Should  the BGP session be restarted after some configured Idle Timer
> expiration?

As Enke stated, this is important question for implementation.

Vendors are having different behaviour today but are also adding feature
to their BGP stack to let user select the behaviour they want.
(on Hold, retry timers, ....).

Vendors are aware of this question.

> 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!

Cease sub-code would be available via SNMP with existing BGP MIB.
It would inform that remote BGP closed for that reason, but there
is no way to know via existing MIB that your box received too many
prefixes and closed BGP.

bgpPeerLastError OID is nice to know from remote peer.

We may need a "bgpPeerSentLastError" to know the exact reason we ceased
BGP session.

This is a talk we need to run for bgp4-mibv2 draft.

Vincent.