nanog mailing list archives
Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs
From: Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 08:14:45 -0400
On Sep 22, 2020, at 4:46 AM, Andy Davidson <andy () nosignal org> wrote: Hi, Douglas Fisher wrote:B) There is any other alternative to that?Don't connect to IXPs with very very large and complicated topologies. Connect to local IXPs where the design makes a forwarding plane failure that causes the problem you describe less likely.
Or don’t use a route server except to bootstrap. I regularly see issues related to them. I get it’s not easy to peer at an IXP, but IXP peering isn’t for everyone as some people might make it sound. This is why back in the day there was a push to require 24x7 staffing of the remote side to ensure it was being monitored/supported. That may no longer apply to many people, but without active monitoring, you won’t know what the state is of the remote side. - Jared
Current thread:
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs, (continued)
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs Saku Ytti (Sep 16)
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs Douglas Fischer (Sep 17)
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs Saku Ytti (Sep 17)
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs Douglas Fischer (Sep 17)
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs Paul Timmins (Sep 17)
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs Baldur Norddahl (Sep 20)
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs Robert Raszuk (Sep 17)
- Re: BFD for routes learned trough Route-servers in IXPs Jared Mauch (Sep 22)