Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd-02.txt

Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> Wed, 15 March 2017 22:23 UTC

Return-Path: <job@instituut.net>
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 5A9DF129C47 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 AoJw-LvltGkw for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:22:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com (mail-wm0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]) (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 00317129C49 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x230.google.com with SMTP id n11so34164771wma.0 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9kcXqXYmlQYLQbGshGk6QAEaMWxogO/WSjF6rRXYy/w=; b=iYi68UwIJzhjn7F4GefglT+6kDFSIhVtJIsZrjvtKjMbdQJAymAfYY6yD6LyNMPNLp vBfLUGCicDHIHjJZNkynmRE2bQLQDVdqFNHxDDrGh3MZL5O0LVMJB/+qRj/zPb76MkEV 15ioRp7gRb1wi4q1j0wlv3w8oMd+vTh/2npCxr8L0OVQiMhRFD+EtOEeSX7RXOLT7q5u tNNca4FvJuzeWrY03zJr3un4Sl+xrg+OJ+H2yZB/s0y4nR2M3IiTYwJQepADWrgPSB1O UhsMTEw70pW/WvXPMIGh1boLVP5HzLZOFOe55N1nJ9BnXfhPxj6BZHlLi7TfzMQn9BnJ X0LA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9kcXqXYmlQYLQbGshGk6QAEaMWxogO/WSjF6rRXYy/w=; b=Cp9cLHFOqP5dHTH+yVux7M5P+Y+AzaHK46r0LjVJ0iwnYvJ3Hgc5cQeRO34hO9xpXJ BLGLCepb0HSdHl44G/uJdahulcDXReWoMUB7ApuOtOlQWq2lFL/Hqbq5H1igb+WqncjS va2/vvkquv/ZjdUDQMTvYIpn183+A0ZYStJDw6TLr6onepS3rv6euYhq7GNH5j17qqvq Fdc38v9Q6+TEmJ7dT8aFq9kJnhnd0lgLUKyLn4C+pQyDOnXT9yl9LZw0ExDNIBuVIG3y Be8y5Pa0ZT3Qe5F0HXr/sMJL0MizDpzfb0OL50bFnIpqdms1bj9Uh67fmSuhytbhgheK Qdbw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2b62ZcQF6RyditYFo8LOgqE5KXcIZ+QTTos0Ud96Nme77DFsn3CpfTIQdzH8CV+3UD6o6LafeYPZxkfA==
X-Received: by 10.28.187.68 with SMTP id l65mr6336604wmf.24.1489616577329; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:22:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.182.162 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [192.147.168.22]
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ER=MnejDq5JNyNUHvf7mV7vkFehbeE65a_5cqFUsTEAzZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+b+ERmLDNzF=TofW=w1OwUzeLGUc-3muMckHTH6Rs=c8rc5bQ@mail.gmail.com> <20170314223333.bw3caxfn34y6zlb7@Vurt.local> <CA+b+ERmMOyqb8HFtNXyDr8e+MNxA7EWmJFukUNgSjAU+69f5CA@mail.gmail.com> <20170314225855.GN12864@pfrc.org> <CA+b+ERkt6MJUPR-4WX0LYZ9CG1FoNX-g4=hnqFB9iQy8WfKOww@mail.gmail.com> <20170315000326.GO12864@pfrc.org> <CA+b+ERmWUL-pVwjW8Vq+Vz8UzYDpcVBZxxhtM6WFqhmG+r35WA@mail.gmail.com> <58C95A05.3030107@foobar.org> <20170315195050.GT12864@pfrc.org> <CA+b+ERn-uya3kB-FgXvfFjdK-hPmj-W-mv_T+TnbEAfkzR8Hfg@mail.gmail.com> <20170315212656.GD2367@Space.Net> <CA+b+ER=MnejDq5JNyNUHvf7mV7vkFehbeE65a_5cqFUsTEAzZA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:22:56 +0100
Message-ID: <CACWOCC-gAPbV0fdraHkkjhSo=Tc_YUFWMTOjx311a2XDJZMDmQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114b09dcf1974d054acc6240
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/qhgG2cCs0UuDHdPRdfDIMs7jeHs>
Subject: Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd-02.txt
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 22:23:02 -0000

On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 at 22:58, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>; wrote:

> Like Job observed for some customers peering to/via IX is just an
> additional optimization hence indeed some may not always put most expensive
> and latest gear there.
>
> Actually after this discussion I am quite curious how many nets on the
> routes servers really have more then one bgp path. If not much then this
> entire effort here may not be practically useful.
>

Did some small crude sampling by asking around:

AMS-IX RS indicated that one out of three routes have an alternative path
DE-CIX RS 1 out of 2 routes have an alternative path
INEX RS seemed to have virtually no alternative paths for the routes

Kind regards,

Job