[c-nsp] BFD for static routes

[Phil Bedard]

BFD is supported on pretty much everything, it's static route support  
for BFD that isn't.

Phil

On Jan 10, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Bruce Pinsky wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Phil Bedard wrote:
>> That's really the "killer app" for this so to speak, is in a L2 metro
>> scenario where you can't propagate the customer link-state back to  
>> the
>> terminating L3 router.   Even the lowest end Cisco router runs BGP
>> these days, so I've used that in the past with private ASs for
>> customers dual-homed, but that requires more configuration and
>> monitoring, etc.  The other option is GRE tunnels but that isn't a
>> very good solution imho.  BFD seems like a better option to me.  It's
>> supported by Juniper, but Cisco seems to only have support in IOS XR.
>>
>> I guess a question to pose to Cisco is what takes more CPU, BFD or IP
>> SLA?  If they are the same, IP SLA (reliable static routes) is
>> certainly an option.
>>
>
> It's supported in more than XR:
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/fs_bfd.html#wp1240666
>
> In fact, echo mode is supported on some platforms as well now.
>
> - --
> =========
> bep
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFHho8yE1XcgMgrtyYRAtWTAKDv6j5Ujq0DWF+HP20Ji3N1A31ZIwCg+Xwv
> Al+uHwDvDb+8Oxi5dF+Yrxk=
> =QYHd
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----