[j-nsp] bfd = busted failure detection :)

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 04:53:44PM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote:
> We've always been in favour of the NSR concept since 
> inception, but the reason we didn't choose it at the time 
> was because of limited protocol support (early days of JUNOS 
> 9.x). Also, only a handful of boxes on the Cisco side 
> support(ed) NSR, yet we like to standardize feature sets 
> even between vendors.
> 
> As at today, NSR supports nearly all major protocols in 
> JUNOS, so it's come back to the table for consideration. 
> Your feedback is certainly encouraging.
> 
> Until then, it's Graceful Restart for now (which, for better 
> or worse, we've been happy with these past 2 years).

It's been slowly trickling in over the last couple years, with each new
code rev. The last protocol support we were waiting on for NSR was RSVP,
which finally came in 9.6. Of course we aren't running 9.6 anywhere yet,
but NSR+ISSU has been working reasonably well in tests of prior versions
with only modest RSVP traffic disruptions, which is still better than
nothing. The only thing to note is that the process takes FOREVER to
complete, reminds me of trying to do GR back in the day of RE-2.0's,
where it took 30 minutes to sync up after a restart. When 9.6R3 comes
out we're planning to start limited deployment experiments in a couple
select test sites, and with any luck our next round of widespread
upgrades will be something where NSR+ISSU is fully working.

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net>       http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)