[c-nsp] BGP routes co-existing with different local-preference

[David J. Hughes]

On 26/10/2005, at 9:39 AM, Bruce Pinsky wrote:

>
> BFD between AS'es is a policy choice and not an implementation choice.
> There should be no reason that a provider shouldn't be able to offer 
> BFD
> capability if they are offering ethernet access (once the feature is
> available in the software/platform they use).  Lowering your timers for
> eBGP sessions with your providers may not be an option either if 1) 
> they
> notice and kill your sessions (again a policy thing); or 2) they run a
> version that enforces a minimum holdtime.

All very true and I hope that the upstreams in question raise our 
reduced timers with us as a "policy issue".  Our response will be that 
they need to provide a way for us to rapidly detect the loss of a peer 
device connected over ethernet.  We'll set our timers back to normal 
when they offer us BFD or we'll use another provider as the business 
cannot live with a 4 minute outage if their router dies.

But, as I mentioned, it's working fine so far.


David
...