On May 9, 2012, at 3:29 PM, Jeffrey Haas wrote: >> Thank you. This seems to indicate that after a g-shut event, the neighbor >> would continue to advertise the prefixes to its peers (albeit tagged with >> the community). Wouldn't this cause non-updated routers to blackhole >> traffic? What happens when only half of you IBGP peers are updated? >> >> If the peering doesn't come back for an extended period, couldn't this cause >> traffic to transit and then be blackholed, assuming there are no alternate >> paths? >> >> This is violating BGP's fundamental principle: "Advertise what you're using, >> use what you advertise." It seems like black holes are inevitable. > > Please see the other clarification I posted. Graceful shutdown is applied > to the routes from the peer that is sending bad updates that are accepted > and valid. Routes that contain errors are processed with the stated "treat > as withdraw" behavior. > > In other words, the goal is to remove the bad neighbor's valid routes from > the forwarding path as much as possible since that neighbor is presumed to > possibly crazy.
Jeff, Understood. I have no issues with withdrawn routes. The issue is with g-shut routes that continue to sink traffic. Tony _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
