 |
 |
Doug, Please do go ahead and expand passive BFD. Everyone on one route server followed by the second route server a few days later should be fine. -- Richard > On Apr 26, 2017, at 10:51, Doug McIntyre <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 09:19:39AM -0500, Mike Horwath wrote: >> Bilateral are unaffected and they can arrange things anyway with their >> peers. > > I think there is a lot more bilateral BGP going on across MICE than you think. > While I probably go talk to anybody, I have 11 unilateral peers on MICE besides > the two route servers. > > I think BFD for BGP would do a lot more good than BGP filtering if people would > implement it. > > Speaking of that, I have passive BFD testing on route server #1 for quite some time. > I've heard of zero problems. > > I would like to go more widespread than the test people (ie. offer it > to every member connection on route server #1) > > Since it is passive, the member end drives it, if they do it, the > route server will do it, if they don't, nothing else happens. I'd also like > to roll out passive BFD as default for new members. > > > -- > Doug McIntyre <[log in to unmask]> > ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ > Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades