[j-nsp] Prioritize route advertisement

[Jeffrey Haas]

> On Apr 17, 2020, at 4:10 AM, <adamv0025 at netconsultings.com> <adamv0025 at netconsultings.com> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>>> The question is if there is a way to work around this change that
>>> behavior?
>>>> 
>>> Wondering if it was due to some slow peer(s) Not sure if juniper BGP
>>> works similarly to cisco BGP in this area (but considering the
>>> differences in update groups between the two it might very well NOT be
>>> the case) But cisco has the following to address slow peers holding
>>> down the whole update group more info at:
>> 
>> Yeah, we don't need that.  We just form optimal micro-groups for the peers
>> that are in the same sync level at a given part of the queue and are ready
> to
>> write.
>> 
> Hi Jeff,
> Can you please expand on this last statement please?
> How do these 17 output queues of the route prioritization system interwork
> with the micro-groups you mentioned please?

Because there's 17 queues. :-)

> The doc quoted by OP says " The queue servicing procedure operates per-BGP
> peer group with each group maintaining its own token buckets." - I think it
> means update-group rather than peer-group, where update-group might or might
> not have a one-to-one relationship to actual update-group.

No, it means that when we end up with a peer group (see "show bgp groups") we'll have a set of distinct token buckets for that group.

> But it also says
> " This means that route priority can vary in each BGP peer group as well as
> in specific neighbor configurations within the BGP peer groups" so I'm
> guessing if it differs per peer then that peer is assigned to its own update
> group (hence the reset of the session)?

This is the usual global to group to neighbor config inheritance along with the usual group split if you configure contrary per-neighbor vs. the group split.

-- Jeff



> Thank you.
> 
> adam
>