Re: [Idr] Frequency of Route Advertisement.

"Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li> Fri, 28 March 2008 06:41 UTC

Return-Path: <idr-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-idr-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-idr-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2C93A6C41; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:41:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.796
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.360, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ELN4Fcbhh-Tf; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:41:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F29EE3A6C5F; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A58E13A679C for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:41:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ACIPDadZwQnF for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from QMTA04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.40]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1F63A69DA for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from OMTA03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.27]) by QMTA04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 6VkN1Z0010bG4ec5404Z00; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:40:26 +0000
Received: from TONYLTM9XP ([24.6.155.154]) by OMTA03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 6Whi1Z0033L8a8Q3P00000; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:41:43 +0000
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=R9f1EQQoLzUiqpE_a7EA:9 a=iCIzv5iYChmkxZ33o10A:7 a=aJa3d_Car8wEIUarOy3g3g347HYA:4 a=lZB815dzVvQA:10 a=gJcimI5xSWUA:10 a=I6w1q-7Qvym-sx8BbcQA:9 a=HjXcBHpBZcpNi2u8dP4A:7 a=iasuaEIQtfmLPlB1t0xdIs6drLkA:4 a=AfD3MYMu9mQA:10
From: "Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>
To: "'Jithu Arun Sreedhar'" <jithuarun@gmail.com>, <idr@ietf.org>
References: <cf2df5d0803272322o17914c56vd0c6d368e61d7b9a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:41:24 -0700
Message-ID: <027701c8909e$beb3dc30$bb2b359b@ad.redback.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <cf2df5d0803272322o17914c56vd0c6d368e61d7b9a@mail.gmail.com>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
Thread-index: AciQnCuMn4ncuA77ToutzTTIuthjiwAAmjzQ
Subject: Re: [Idr] Frequency of Route Advertisement.
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tony.li@tony.li
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0271579404=="
Sender: idr-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: idr-bounces@ietf.org

 
Yes, withdraws should be propagated immediately.  However, the generation of
a withdrawl should then subsequently be considered as similar to an
advertisement in whatever mechanism you use for avoiding subsequent flap.
 
Tony
 


  _____  

From: idr-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jithu
Arun Sreedhar
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:23 PM
To: idr@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] Frequency of Route Advertisement.


Hi
 
With reference to the BGPv4 RFC's, the RFC 4271 has been modified from the
RFC 1771, including the withdraw routes in the procedure to control route
advertisement frequency.
 
I would like to know :-
1) Shouldnt we advertised the withdrawn routes as soon as possible to aviod
black-holes (as identified in the RF1771) ?.
2) Was this change made in light of more frequent route flapping causing
withdrawal of routes than actual route withdrawal occuring?
 
Jithu Arun

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr