Hi Jeff,
> If a route has a change when in the midst of serializing a snapshot, what 
>doyou do?  Probably not pause all route monitoring until we're done - or at
least that's my hope.
I would hope so too. Ideally the snapshot can be paused, i.e. route-monitoring 
should take priority over snapshot. But I do realize this might be "difficult" 
for some implementations/designs.
Regards,Reshad.

    On Thursday, November 6, 2025 at 03:13:50 PM EST, Jeffrey Haas 
<[email protected]> wrote:  
 
 Reshad,

On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 07:47:23PM +0000, Reshad Rahman wrote:
> Wrt having an indication that says "this is part of a snapshot", isn't this 
> covered by the Snapshot Id TLV?

Partially!  And I admit to reading too fast and thinking that this was only
being added to the peer-up messaging. :-)
(Admit it when you're being lazy...)


>    On Thursday, November 6, 2025 at 01:58:50 PM EST, Jeffrey Haas 
><[email protected]> wrote:  
> > One possible way to address this ambiguity is to include a boolean TLV that
> > says "this is a snapshot".  By direct analogy, if you were sending a route
> > solely because of a "route refresh" type snapshot behavior, this is distinct
> > from a topology change.

So, I think the distinction I was scanning (poorly) for is the situation
where you have the topology change while you're serializing your snapshot.

If a route has a change when in the midst of serializing a snapshot, what do
you do?  Probably not pause all route monitoring until we're done - or at
least that's my hope.

So, this would mean that we'd drop the new TLV in this case?  

When this is going into an MRT file in the traditional way for a new dump
file, this is less of a problem.  The more confusing case is the live
monitoring situation.

As an example of how this behavior could differ in an implementation,
Juniper's implementation of BGP permits routes in the rib-out to be
prioritized into a number of user-configured queues.  Refreshes may be
placed in a different queue than topology changes.  This is beneficial to
ensure that a refersh doesn't enqueue a large number of prefixes for
advertisement and block something important behind the refreshes.

-- Jeff

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
  
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to