nanog mailing list archives
Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 23:06:07 -0400
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:40 PM, JRC NOC <nospam-nanog () jensenresearch com> wrote:
Is this just an unavoidable issue with scaling large networks?
nope... sounds like (to me at least) the forwarding plane and control plane are non-congruent in your provider's network :( so as you said, if the forwarding-plane is dorked up between you and 'the rest of their netowrk', but the edge device you are connected to thinks next-hops for routes are still valid... oops :(
Is it perhaps a known side effect of MPLS?
nope.
Have we/they lost something important in the changeover to converged mutiprotocol networks? Is there a better way for us edge networks to achieve IP resiliency in the current environment?
sadly I bet not, aside from active probing and disabling paths that are non-functional.
Current thread:
- BGP failure analysis and recommendations JRC NOC (Oct 23)
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Christopher Morrow (Oct 23)
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Brandon Ross (Oct 24)
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Christopher Morrow (Oct 24)
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Brandon Ross (Oct 24)
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Brandon Ross (Oct 24)
- RE: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Sam Roche (Oct 24)
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Christopher Morrow (Oct 23)
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Pete Lumbis (Oct 25)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Courtney Smith (Oct 24)
- Re: BGP failure analysis and recommendations Scott Weeks (Oct 24)