Phil Mayers wrote:
Justin Shore wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
Common advice seems to be to make actual link-loss detection fast, in
preference to using BFD. That said, I know some people use BFD.
Assuming you're using LAN cards, you may want to see if you can make
router links as routed rather than SVI interfaces. Though routed
interfaces are implemented internally as VLANs, presentations I saw
from Cisco claim that this:
I prefer to use BFD personally. Link failure detection without BFD
will be slow no matter what you do. FRR doesn't gain you much if it
takes you several seconds to realize that a link dropped.
Seconds? Wow. I'm curious - under what circumstances are you seeing such
length link-loss detection times?
On our 7600s today. We drop a link to one of them and the thing is
oblivious to the drop for 2-3 seconds. Dumber than a post... L3 is
waiting on L1 to wake up before it can start tearing down routing
relationships and pulling routes. I'm running SRB1 on my 7600s right
now so that I can run BFD. I'm trying to get my account team to carry
my BFD on SVI request to the DE team for BFD or the product manager.
Unfortunately I think I'm throwing pennies into a blackhole.
Justin
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
