Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode
Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@nexthop.com> Tue, 15 January 2002 21:06 UTC
Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA08999 for <idr-archive@nic.merit.edu>; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:06:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id A4FF691269; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:05:35 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu
Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 6CAD39126A; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:05:35 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr@trapdoor.merit.edu
Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 628ED91269 for <idr@trapdoor.merit.edu>; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:05:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 35B5F5DDB0; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:05:34 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: idr@merit.edu
Received: from presque.djinesys.com (presque.djinesys.com [198.108.88.2]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE9775DDA5 for <idr@merit.edu>; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:05:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: from jhaas.nexthop.com (jhaas.nexthop.com [64.211.218.31]) by presque.djinesys.com (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g0FL5Q398122; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:05:27 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhaas@nexthop.com)
Received: (from jhaas@localhost) by jhaas.nexthop.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id g0FL5Qg16553; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:05:26 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:05:26 -0500
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@nexthop.com>
To: Susan Hares <skh@nexthop.com>
Cc: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>, idr@merit.edu
Subject: Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode
Message-ID: <20020115160526.A16527@nexthop.com>
References: <200201141728.g0EHSr633936@merlot.juniper.net> <005001c2b9ba$3094a9e0$9989bc3e@tom3> <200201141728.g0EHSr633936@merlot.juniper.net> <20020114123700.C7761@nexthop.com> <5.0.0.25.0.20020114151919.0329db98@mail.nexthop.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.0.20020114151919.0329db98@mail.nexthop.com>; from skh@nexthop.com on Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 03:19:58PM -0500
X-NextHop-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Sender: owner-idr@merit.edu
Precedence: bulk
Gentlefolk, Perhaps this will add some clarification on "what does this mean to me" to have the "new state" in the FSM: 1. RFC 1771 has exponential backoff documented. 1a. The current draft allows a ceiling on this value. 2. The original FSM documents 6 states. When you attempt to expand the state table from the normative text (even without the distinction of a manual vs. automatic start/stop events), you arrive at another undocumented state. 3. The draft explicitly documents this state and makes explicit the difference between the manual vs. the automatic events. The state table the Sue had posted some time ago (wasn't that supposed to be in the appendix?) covers all the events and the states. 4. What does this do to implementations that supported the exponential backoff? Probably not much. You can LIVE with the existing Idle state for both MIB and for CLI display purposes. What was originally implied was that there was a timer (you could show it in your CLI for example) that would implement the exponential backoff. 5. The new draft makes the state explicitly visible. As this primarily affects the display within a CLI and the MIB rather than the on-the-wire protocol, there's no need to panic. Implementation: If you implement exponential backoff, it should be pretty trivial to insert the new "state" into you FSM to deal with the un-expired timer event. It will be 7 in the MIB obviously. :-) If we don't have enough wiggle room in the spec to deal with those who don't implment the expoential backoff, perhaps a SHOULD can be added in the appropriate spot - or the spec should remain silent on the issue and let people be non-compliant. Sue, Yakov: Is the fact that the new state would only be visible by a outside of protocol scope means going to stop us from going to full standard? Technically, it is measurable by watching for the packets and the delays between them but this doesn't break interoperability. -- Jeff Haas NextHop Technologies
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: Comments on FSM Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Vincent Gillet
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Vincent Gillet
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: Comments on FSM Jeffrey Haas
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Russ White
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Russ White
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Kunihiro Ishiguro
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Russ White
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode andrewl
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Randy Bush
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: Comments on FSM Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Randy Bush
- Re: Comments on FSM Kunihiro Ishiguro
- Comments on FSM Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Enke Chen
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Greg Hankins
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Kunihiro Ishiguro
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Kunihiro Ishiguro
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Russ White
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Jeffrey Haas
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Russ White
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Alex Zinin
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Russ White
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Eric Gray
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Russ White
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Eric Gray
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Jeff Pickering
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Vincent Gillet
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Russ White
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Susan Hares
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Yakov Rekhter
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Jeffrey Haas
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Yakov Rekhter
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Tom Petch
- Re: bgp4-17 Cease subcode Yakov Rekhter
- bgp4-17 Cease subcode Tom Petch
- Re: processing order of reach/unreach in rfc2858b… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: processing order of reach/unreach in rfc2858b… Enke Chen