IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OSPF] OSPF GR and BFD operability

"Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com> Tue, 25 August 2015 15:28 UTC

Return-Path: <ginsberg@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA56A1B2EDD for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 08:28:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 MKqX3HunxZSc for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 08:28:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A4201B2B92 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=13326; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1440516483; x=1441726083; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=1zhC+R3kdc00mH5vW8V6CTWR+ubWT+RLSH6AhigvcQs=; b=Fu8wmrCLtfjDrjIBuO3IEc1dGepTnsKmJZeqqCL1YzgbG7LVK3PJbkTw rmhBgov4u+VfG5s3nio+dFvlMmA0+VJ7UxIsXPvYizy/D3jC6u2vhASEt VcrIDOFywXuprOSla0WB9E3QARHOTX41My4bB+nLHhem+XR4vH+wE9LpX E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ChAgAIidxV/51dJa1dgk5NVGkGgx+6ZgEJgXeFewIcgRY4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQjAQEBBCMKXAIBCBEDAQEBCx0DAgICHxEUCQgCBAESCIgRAxINsm+PXQ2FLgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARMEi1eCT4FgKiANCgGCaS+BFAWVNwGLBJUHhzomg35xAQGBRoEEAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.15,746,1432598400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="23402296"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 Aug 2015 15:28:02 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-020.cisco.com (xch-aln-020.cisco.com [173.36.7.30]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t7PFS2IC012004 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:28:02 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-020.cisco.com (173.36.7.30) by XCH-ALN-020.cisco.com (173.36.7.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 10:28:01 -0500
Received: from xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com (173.36.12.88) by xch-aln-020.cisco.com (173.36.7.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 10:28:01 -0500
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.3]) by xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com ([173.36.12.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 10:28:00 -0500
From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Anil Raj <anilraj85@gmail.com>, OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] OSPF GR and BFD operability
Thread-Index: AQHQ30EdcykVrLLZMEmoUK29+OkpU54dIP8A//+1cuA=
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:27:59 +0000
Message-ID: <F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F5956187C@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
References: <CAPj3AOpO+o2hBp3J+mPXpwWiho5fMxE97b1SKsHigRfTQSGzjw@mail.gmail.com> <D201F336.2C912%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D201F336.2C912%acee@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [128.107.163.77]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F5956187Cxmbalnx02ciscoc_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/zZxhNqPyqBoEVoMmr0hjwk-I1Bw>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF GR and BFD operability
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ospf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:28:05 -0000

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5882.txt Section 4.3<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5882.txt%20Section%204.3> is relevant here.

   Les


From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 7:54 AM
To: Anil Raj; OSPF WG List
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF GR and BFD operability

Hi Anil,

OSPF and OSPFv3 graceful restart pre-dated BFD so this wasn’t explicitly covered. However, given that the intension is that the data plane is preserved during restart, an implementation could interpret this as a topology change and terminate helper mode as documented in section 3.2 of RFC 3623.
Hope this helps,
Acee



From: OSPF <ospf-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Anil Raj <anilraj85@gmail.com<mailto:anilraj85@gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 10:19 AM
To: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org<mailto:ospf@ietf.org>>
Subject: [OSPF] OSPF GR and BFD operability

Hi,

I need clarification on the behavior when BFD notifies remote inactivity for a OSPF session, when OSPF neighbor is undergoing Graceful restart? OSPF router in helper mode will ideally inactivate the restarting neighbor only after grace period, and if BFD notifies neighbor down to OSPF, should the adjacency be terminated? If not, will it cause a blackhole for the entire grace period if the neighbor is actually down?

Appreciate if you can help here.

Regards,
Anil

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email