[j-nsp] Prioritize route advertisement

[Brian Johnson]

If you have inconsistent MTUs throughout your implementation, you can cause fragmentation and this will lead to re-transmittals.

In other words… it will be slower, possibly extremely slow depending on the volume.

- Brian


Brian Johnson
brian at sdjohnsons.us

> On Apr 6, 2020, at 10:16 AM, Jason Lixfeld <jason-jnsp at lixfeld.ca> wrote:
> 
> Is it possible it’s related to the MTU change itself?  I only mention it because I ran into a convergence issue between a MX10K3 and a JRR200 in the lab when I was timing convergence speeds.  It took many minutes for the JRR to receive the full table.  It turned out to be a lower MTU on an intermediate device in the lab core.  Once that was fixed, the JRR receive the full table in less than a minute.
> 
>> On Apr 6, 2020, at 11:05 AM, Gustavo Santos <gustkiller at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> We have a MX10003 as peering router with over 400 BGP sessions. Last week
>> we had to change MTU from one Interface and after change, the router took
>> about 20 minutes to advertise routes some of our transit providers.
>> 
>> Is there a way to prioritize advertisement on some BGP sessions above
>> others? I tried the
>> https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/topic-map/bgp-route-prioritization.html
>> 
>> 
>> The first time I noticed that behavior and with that event , this options
>> did not worked as expected.
>> 
>> The question is if there is a way to work around this change that behavior?
>> 
>> Regards.
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp