Re: [karp] BFD Authentication costs

Joel Halpern Direct <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com> Wed, 31 July 2013 12:40 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: karp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: karp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E04B721F9CE9 for <karp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4n42JxQiA85H for <karp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:40:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37DF911E8109 for <karp@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DAE31C0546; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from dhcp-427a.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-427a.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.66.122]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E46E1C0452; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51F9058A.8050709@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:39:38 -0400
From: Joel Halpern Direct <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Russ White <russw@riw.us>
References: <51F8F576.8020205@joelhalpern.com> <20211F91F544D247976D84C5D778A4C32E462595@SG70YWXCHMBA05.zap.alcatel-lucent.com> <00a501ce8dea$d8dc4120$8a94c360$@riw.us>
In-Reply-To: <00a501ce8dea$d8dc4120$8a94c360$@riw.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: karp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [karp] BFD Authentication costs
X-BeenThere: karp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for key management for routing and transport protocols <karp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/karp>, <mailto:karp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/karp>
List-Post: <mailto:karp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:karp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/karp>, <mailto:karp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:40:32 -0000

After I sent my note, I thought of some cases on my own.  But I do think 
it is important that we think about the scale at which we want to make 
this work.

Yours,
Joel

On 7/31/13 8:38 AM, Russ White wrote:
>
>>> In practice, on most devices, when BFD is run at low intervals it is
>>> done directly on the line card.  Doesn't this mean that in most
>>> topologies the number of sessions is roughly the same as the number of
>>> physical ports on the device?
>>
>> Not necessarily. Our customers use vlan tagged IP Interfaces where the #
> of
>> sessions on a physical port can be greater than 1 (and it usually is).
>
> I would say this is pretty normal --ie, customers running multiple logical
> interfaces is more common than the one-to-one situation, in my experience.
>
> Russ
>