[c-nsp] BGP Route Dampening

[Andrew Miehs]

RIPEs view on this is:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-378

And in short: Dated 2006...
4.0 Recommendation

This Routing Working Group document proposes that with the current
implementations of BGP flap damping, the application of flap damping in ISP
networks is NOT recommended. The recommendations given in ripe-229 and
previous documents [2] are considered obsolete henceforth.

If flap damping is implemented, the ISP operating that network will cause
side-effects to their customers and the Internet users of their customers'
content and services as described in the previous sections. These
side-effects would quite likely be worse than the impact caused by simply
not running flap damping at all.





On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> wrote:

> On (2013-03-11 14:08 +0300), Ahmed Hilmy wrote:
>
> > Thanks Sahu for your reply,  would you please  clarify this point (  just
> > make it negative local_pref penalty ) ?
>
> It's not something you can do. It's just something I wish vendors would
> implement.
> Today if dampening triggers, route is removed from RIB, which is
> undesirable to many. If instead its local_pref was decreased, we would use
> more stable routes (and propagate stable routes), but if it was last route,
> we'd still have reachability when route is in table.
>
>
> --
>   ++ytti
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>