IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Thu, 30 July 2020 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <ppsenak@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBFFE3A123D for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:21:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 hPLuycRQQoQB for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 165433A121C for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:21:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=721; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1596118877; x=1597328477; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yEeZBLyu3zTldYuXxolq8Fj0Tt7ueHZodE2PTfw+X44=; b=AVPlsm23vDYsjx6Nxhfj+kWT75ECQ620pO7m1OLufX0maz1HbKrfTPA9 HiYU9/fWthtcFRBWiSWf+13H6vIH2jYeMFIXZGwdK8B23cLM5n+V8WfSL 0egBF0P9+EXvapJivuLoUoLpZug9TV7oPZ10+7OHPczpcysXUlhKf+FI1 U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ALAABF1iJf/xbLJq1gGgEBAQEBAQEBAQEDAQEBARIBAQEBAgIBAQEBQIE4AwEBAQELAYNsASAShGGJAYgXmhCBfQsBAQEOLwQBAYRMAoIvJTYHDgIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEGBG2FaIVxAQEBAwEjDwEFPwIQCxgCAiYCAlcGDQgBAYMigl0gr0B2gTKFUoM4gUCBDioBjSaBQT+BESeCaT6HU4JgBJIykm+QZoJpgwqWaQUHAx6RS44pgSiMM6QLgVoNJoFXMxoIGxWDJU8ZDY5WjhI/A2cCBgEHAQEDCZBYAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,414,1589241600"; d="scan'208";a="28292840"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 30 Jul 2020 14:21:13 +0000
Received: from [10.60.140.51] (ams-ppsenak-nitro2.cisco.com [10.60.140.51]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 06UELCcQ006819; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:21:12 GMT
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: Huzhibo <huzhibo@huawei.com>, Aijun Wang <wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn>, lsr <lsr@ietf.org>, Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>, Xiaoyaqun <xiaoyaqun@huawei.com>
References: <b85c277f-07d2-f40d-071d-295512ea7c73@cisco.com> <B1061E81-F9B6-4647-B5D6-B97D67C4AD8E@chinatelecom.cn> <fc0369b2-6f76-48f1-2c0e-e218e6db5e7b@cisco.com> <06CF729DA0D6854E8C1E5121AC3330DFAF71770C@dggemm509-mbx.china.huawei.com> <43f707e5-4409-670f-0983-0c672da53ecb@cisco.com> <96779843-a40d-e83b-8d24-baeb6c8648ea@cisco.com> <CAOj+MME7ADcnxe-m0JJ-EpWCzczhC6O8QY5xrxDQRA0w3aRGjQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <2a6844df-59ed-ca91-c306-d2288c44a1dc@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 16:21:12 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MME7ADcnxe-m0JJ-EpWCzczhC6O8QY5xrxDQRA0w3aRGjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.60.140.51, ams-ppsenak-nitro2.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/W7RCdrLBJySlGKi_UlfgvnOxctY>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:21:26 -0000

On 30/07/2020 16:14, Robert Raszuk wrote:
>      > 2：For bgp example，when the pe node down，the bgp peer must down
>     within
>      > 30 mintus，It will not get it up via cancle advertise pua.
> 
>     for the above it is sufficient to advertise the unreachability for few
>     seconds from each ABR independently. That would be a much more solid
>     proposal.
> 
> 
> Not sure about "few seconds" ... IBGP def hold time in number of 
> implementations is 180 sec :) .. but few minutes will work for sure.

depends how you use it.

If you can use the unreachable info in a smart way, it's sufficient if 
it is present for a very short time interval.

thanks,
Peter

> 
> Thx,
> R.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email