On Sun, 16 Jan 2011, Phil Bedard wrote:
If BGP stability is the main goal, do not use BFD with your BGP sessions.
Are you using site multi-homing with the connected CE devices or are they
all single-homed? I don't know your topology but there may be some
instances where you would want to run BFD for BGP notification with
multi-homing.
What hardware are you using? We are using 300x3 everywhere and while we
have seen some isolated false positives, things have been relatively
stable.
Phil,
I am using MX gear, and the ppmd offload to the PFEs for BFD does appear
to help a lot. Unfortunately, we have uncovered a few bugs using BFD like
this in our deployment over the past year, but the more recent 10.2 code
revs appear to fix many of these issues.
Good point about VPLS multi-homing. I should have mentioned that we are
using it. In some cases we have it running on our core routers.
Typically, since a core router is acting as a BGP route reflector, the
core router is also a VPLS multi-home primary or backup site -- trying to
take advantage of the redundancy. Also, we are looking at multi-homing on
some of our distribution routers. Knowing that about my topology, any
further thoughts on BFD for BGP?
I am not sure I totally grasp what is going on during a failover (manual
or otherwise) of VPLS multihoming, so I'll take whatever insight you might
have.
Thanks.
Clarke Morledge
College of William and Mary
Information Technology - Network Engineering
Jones Hall (Room 18)
Williamsburg VA 23187
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
