[j-nsp] BFD/IS-IS wait to re-establish adjacency after failure tweak knob?

[Duane Grant]

in every OS I've used, you need a registering protocol to get bfd to start,
and if you start shutting them down (or remove peer reachability), bfd will
admindown itself, which causes interesting consequences.

if you want bfd to watch a physical link, have it monitor a static route,
but you'll also need something on the other side responding to it, so its
two statics...

OAM is likely a better solution for what you're looking for...

--Duane


On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:

>
>
> On 19/May/16 12:13, Saku Ytti wrote:
>
> > +1 why create higher abstraction layers and complicated notifications
> > per protocols, when usually if we need single-hop BFD, we need it
> > because we broke physical liveliness detection
>
> +1.
>
> It has always been assumed that routing or signaling protocols are the
> clients of BFD. If BFD can be protocol-independent, that would be great.
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>