On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 09:34:21AM -0500, Andrew Hoyos wrote:
> I???d disagree. The maintenance currently taking place affects more
> than just the route servers. Plenty of people are doing bi-lateral
> peering on MICE, and that *IS* affected by maintenance events like
> these.
Right - but that's for the bilateral peers to work on.
Forcing the issue by adding an ACL that they may not have asked for
seems kind of .. intruding.
> Adding an ACL to the port ensures graceful shutdown/end of traffic,
> rather than an abrupt drop and hold timer fun. I???d much rather
> that someone running the maintenance and in control of the ultimate
> link up/down events be the one deciding when things are
> starting/ending and re-enabling traffic gracefully.
I don't know if everyone accepts that.
I'm playing devils advocate only.
> > Clean shutdown of bird is easier, quicker, and will for sure make the
> > multilateral peering not be further affected by bouncing repeatedly.
>
> Yes, great for MLPA, but not for bilateral.
Bilateral users are already adding to their complication by having
many more peers than just going multilateral.
> Why break everyone and cause a total route server outage, when
> it???s not necessary at all? Yesterday???s maintenance only
> affected a portion of members. ACL???s on member ports would be the
> cleanest way to minimize outage duration for all members with the
> least impact to the IX as a whole.
That member would have still been affected and would not have helped
reduce the noise.
--
Mike Horwath, reachable via [log in to unmask]
|