d*w
2 楼
看得我这叫一个气啊*
w*5
3 楼
热体
s*r
4 楼
PPS上~
J*9
5 楼
by Thievery Corporation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wQjJSZ0Ky0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wQjJSZ0Ky0
G*n
6 楼
就是信上帝上天堂,不信上帝下地狱。我就想我爸我妈我爷爷我奶奶,我哥们我朋友没
有一个信的,他们死后都去地狱了就算我信了将来去天堂又有什么意思。。。天堂上一
个熟人都没有,我宁可去地狱去。。。好歹被火烤的时候还有个伴。。。。。
有一个信的,他们死后都去地狱了就算我信了将来去天堂又有什么意思。。。天堂上一
个熟人都没有,我宁可去地狱去。。。好歹被火烤的时候还有个伴。。。。。
u*e
7 楼
深夜上来向大家再请教一个问题:
我有一个路由器,上面两个ISP线路,也就是两个BGP sessions. 我的目的是在其中一
根线出问题,比如down了,我的数据流能以最短的时间,切换到另外一根线上。丢包能
越少越好。
起初我配置了两根线,两个BGP,就是希望,在一根线出问题时,另外一根线可以take
over所有的数据。实际上也是这样,但是我发现了一个问题:这个切换时间好像比较长
,不能满足我们的要求。
一下是我的分析,请大家给点意见:
当本地路由器60秒内没有收到keepalive 包(比如对方的路由器down了),他就要再等
一个holdertimer 180秒的时间,然后,BGP session 就被认为彻底的down了,TCP链接
也被关闭了。这个时候,路由器才会删除原来的路由,然后接受从另外一根线来的路由
。(两根线都是通告全网路由。)我感觉这个过程应该是对的把。可是从链路down开始
,到本地路由器完成路由表的更新,好像至少240秒。。。这个是不是太长了?
我现在想到的方法是在确认uplink down时,直接进行 BGP 软清。 但是还没有做过测
试,不知道,这样会不会缩短整个过程?或者大家有什么别的solution去解决这个问题
。。。
这个地方我有个假设,我是监测到对方链路出问题。。。请问我应该怎样做,才能监测
到这个链路down 呢?
我有一个路由器,上面两个ISP线路,也就是两个BGP sessions. 我的目的是在其中一
根线出问题,比如down了,我的数据流能以最短的时间,切换到另外一根线上。丢包能
越少越好。
起初我配置了两根线,两个BGP,就是希望,在一根线出问题时,另外一根线可以take
over所有的数据。实际上也是这样,但是我发现了一个问题:这个切换时间好像比较长
,不能满足我们的要求。
一下是我的分析,请大家给点意见:
当本地路由器60秒内没有收到keepalive 包(比如对方的路由器down了),他就要再等
一个holdertimer 180秒的时间,然后,BGP session 就被认为彻底的down了,TCP链接
也被关闭了。这个时候,路由器才会删除原来的路由,然后接受从另外一根线来的路由
。(两根线都是通告全网路由。)我感觉这个过程应该是对的把。可是从链路down开始
,到本地路由器完成路由表的更新,好像至少240秒。。。这个是不是太长了?
我现在想到的方法是在确认uplink down时,直接进行 BGP 软清。 但是还没有做过测
试,不知道,这样会不会缩短整个过程?或者大家有什么别的solution去解决这个问题
。。。
这个地方我有个假设,我是监测到对方链路出问题。。。请问我应该怎样做,才能监测
到这个链路down 呢?
m*t
8 楼
Anybody here familier w/ FAS 52? I got confused by the foreign currency
transaction gain/loss and FX translation.
Say, if an entity has loan receivable in foreign currency. Every month, it
accrues interest receivable. Interest receivable (using BS rate) is debited
and interest revenue (using IS rate) credited. The difference is booked to
FX transaction gain/loss. Does this all seem correct?? Thanks!
transaction gain/loss and FX translation.
Say, if an entity has loan receivable in foreign currency. Every month, it
accrues interest receivable. Interest receivable (using BS rate) is debited
and interest revenue (using IS rate) credited. The difference is booked to
FX transaction gain/loss. Does this all seem correct?? Thanks!
x*i
11 楼
第一季的末尾把我看伤了,看到无敌花痴费董起鸡皮疙瘩,后面不会是真跟那个花花公
子好了吧?根本没必要,还是她那个青梅竹马的男朋友更可爱
子好了吧?根本没必要,还是她那个青梅竹马的男朋友更可爱
K*N
12 楼
哇,开始很像南疆,我也喜欢开始的那一节音乐
【在 J**9 的大作中提到】
: by Thievery Corporation
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wQjJSZ0Ky0
【在 J**9 的大作中提到】
: by Thievery Corporation
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wQjJSZ0Ky0
f*m
13 楼
单从control plane而言,你需要BFD
data plane上, 你需要FRR
take
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 深夜上来向大家再请教一个问题:
: 我有一个路由器,上面两个ISP线路,也就是两个BGP sessions. 我的目的是在其中一
: 根线出问题,比如down了,我的数据流能以最短的时间,切换到另外一根线上。丢包能
: 越少越好。
: 起初我配置了两根线,两个BGP,就是希望,在一根线出问题时,另外一根线可以take
: over所有的数据。实际上也是这样,但是我发现了一个问题:这个切换时间好像比较长
: ,不能满足我们的要求。
: 一下是我的分析,请大家给点意见:
: 当本地路由器60秒内没有收到keepalive 包(比如对方的路由器down了),他就要再等
: 一个holdertimer 180秒的时间,然后,BGP session 就被认为彻底的down了,TCP链接
data plane上, 你需要FRR
take
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 深夜上来向大家再请教一个问题:
: 我有一个路由器,上面两个ISP线路,也就是两个BGP sessions. 我的目的是在其中一
: 根线出问题,比如down了,我的数据流能以最短的时间,切换到另外一根线上。丢包能
: 越少越好。
: 起初我配置了两根线,两个BGP,就是希望,在一根线出问题时,另外一根线可以take
: over所有的数据。实际上也是这样,但是我发现了一个问题:这个切换时间好像比较长
: ,不能满足我们的要求。
: 一下是我的分析,请大家给点意见:
: 当本地路由器60秒内没有收到keepalive 包(比如对方的路由器down了),他就要再等
: 一个holdertimer 180秒的时间,然后,BGP session 就被认为彻底的down了,TCP链接
n*l
16 楼
are you concerned about inbound traffic at all?
b*p
18 楼
Ok, your purpose is to speed up bgp convergence to reflect uplink/node
failure. Normally there is 2 ways to achieve it, 1 is sub-second level and
another one is tens-second level.
So, let me correct your theory first. Cisco IOS default BGP timers are 60/
180, where the hold time is 180 sec. From the RFC 4271,
If a system does not receive successive KEEPALIVE, UPDATE, and/or
NOTIFICATION messages within the period specified in the Hold Time
So the total time to wait before bgp releases the peer is down is 180 sec,
instead of 60+180=240.
Now you have the first solution, decrease the bgp timers. You have to check
with your ISPs, what's minimum bgp timers they support. If you select 10/30,
so it means your convergence time is 30 second level. But you show not and
is not suggested to use over-aggressive timers like 1/3, because if the
routers' cpu are busy to process other jobs, it may miss keepalive pkt and
trigger bgp termination.
The 2nd solution is to use BFD as other guy mentioned. Well, you have to ask
your ISP again to make sure if they support it or not. This is a light-
weight keepalive process, which can achieve sub-second level failure
detection. On bgp side, it is a single line config like "neighbor x.x.x.x
fall-over bfd".
take
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 深夜上来向大家再请教一个问题:
: 我有一个路由器,上面两个ISP线路,也就是两个BGP sessions. 我的目的是在其中一
: 根线出问题,比如down了,我的数据流能以最短的时间,切换到另外一根线上。丢包能
: 越少越好。
: 起初我配置了两根线,两个BGP,就是希望,在一根线出问题时,另外一根线可以take
: over所有的数据。实际上也是这样,但是我发现了一个问题:这个切换时间好像比较长
: ,不能满足我们的要求。
: 一下是我的分析,请大家给点意见:
: 当本地路由器60秒内没有收到keepalive 包(比如对方的路由器down了),他就要再等
: 一个holdertimer 180秒的时间,然后,BGP session 就被认为彻底的down了,TCP链接
failure. Normally there is 2 ways to achieve it, 1 is sub-second level and
another one is tens-second level.
So, let me correct your theory first. Cisco IOS default BGP timers are 60/
180, where the hold time is 180 sec. From the RFC 4271,
If a system does not receive successive KEEPALIVE, UPDATE, and/or
NOTIFICATION messages within the period specified in the Hold Time
So the total time to wait before bgp releases the peer is down is 180 sec,
instead of 60+180=240.
Now you have the first solution, decrease the bgp timers. You have to check
with your ISPs, what's minimum bgp timers they support. If you select 10/30,
so it means your convergence time is 30 second level. But you show not and
is not suggested to use over-aggressive timers like 1/3, because if the
routers' cpu are busy to process other jobs, it may miss keepalive pkt and
trigger bgp termination.
The 2nd solution is to use BFD as other guy mentioned. Well, you have to ask
your ISP again to make sure if they support it or not. This is a light-
weight keepalive process, which can achieve sub-second level failure
detection. On bgp side, it is a single line config like "neighbor x.x.x.x
fall-over bfd".
take
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 深夜上来向大家再请教一个问题:
: 我有一个路由器,上面两个ISP线路,也就是两个BGP sessions. 我的目的是在其中一
: 根线出问题,比如down了,我的数据流能以最短的时间,切换到另外一根线上。丢包能
: 越少越好。
: 起初我配置了两根线,两个BGP,就是希望,在一根线出问题时,另外一根线可以take
: over所有的数据。实际上也是这样,但是我发现了一个问题:这个切换时间好像比较长
: ,不能满足我们的要求。
: 一下是我的分析,请大家给点意见:
: 当本地路由器60秒内没有收到keepalive 包(比如对方的路由器down了),他就要再等
: 一个holdertimer 180秒的时间,然后,BGP session 就被认为彻底的down了,TCP链接
u*e
21 楼
先上来感谢各位高手的回复。太感谢大家了,特别是buyup。 你的回复真的很详细,下
面我就要好好研究一下这两种方法。如果再有问题,我再来更新!总之太感谢了!!!
面我就要好好研究一下这两种方法。如果再有问题,我再来更新!总之太感谢了!!!
u*e
22 楼
Hi buyup,
再次感谢你的回复。我下午网上查了点资料,关于你说的BFD, 现在有几个问题还请你
帮忙解释一下:
一旦我们启用了bfd以后,比如我设置那个bfd liveness detection 是一秒,那么一旦
我本地路由器没有收到回复,是不是路由起马上就把当前bgp session 给kill, 转到另
外一个bgp 线上了? 这个过程是怎么运作的?在网上没有看到说的很清楚的。。
你提到两个方法,第一种是10秒级的,就是修改timer,我感觉这个不是很适合我们的
video service. 估计这个bfd 可能更适合我们的需求。
另外,又看到大家提出,ip FRR: 如果我们使用bfd,我们是否仍然需要这个呢?我们
的所有设备都是juniper 的,我看了,juniper 好像有个类似的协议:Host fast
reroute (HFRR)。 你熟悉这个吗?
谢谢!
check
【在 b***p 的大作中提到】
: Ok, your purpose is to speed up bgp convergence to reflect uplink/node
: failure. Normally there is 2 ways to achieve it, 1 is sub-second level and
: another one is tens-second level.
: So, let me correct your theory first. Cisco IOS default BGP timers are 60/
: 180, where the hold time is 180 sec. From the RFC 4271,
: If a system does not receive successive KEEPALIVE, UPDATE, and/or
: NOTIFICATION messages within the period specified in the Hold Time
: So the total time to wait before bgp releases the peer is down is 180 sec,
: instead of 60+180=240.
: Now you have the first solution, decrease the bgp timers. You have to check
再次感谢你的回复。我下午网上查了点资料,关于你说的BFD, 现在有几个问题还请你
帮忙解释一下:
一旦我们启用了bfd以后,比如我设置那个bfd liveness detection 是一秒,那么一旦
我本地路由器没有收到回复,是不是路由起马上就把当前bgp session 给kill, 转到另
外一个bgp 线上了? 这个过程是怎么运作的?在网上没有看到说的很清楚的。。
你提到两个方法,第一种是10秒级的,就是修改timer,我感觉这个不是很适合我们的
video service. 估计这个bfd 可能更适合我们的需求。
另外,又看到大家提出,ip FRR: 如果我们使用bfd,我们是否仍然需要这个呢?我们
的所有设备都是juniper 的,我看了,juniper 好像有个类似的协议:Host fast
reroute (HFRR)。 你熟悉这个吗?
谢谢!
check
【在 b***p 的大作中提到】
: Ok, your purpose is to speed up bgp convergence to reflect uplink/node
: failure. Normally there is 2 ways to achieve it, 1 is sub-second level and
: another one is tens-second level.
: So, let me correct your theory first. Cisco IOS default BGP timers are 60/
: 180, where the hold time is 180 sec. From the RFC 4271,
: If a system does not receive successive KEEPALIVE, UPDATE, and/or
: NOTIFICATION messages within the period specified in the Hold Time
: So the total time to wait before bgp releases the peer is down is 180 sec,
: instead of 60+180=240.
: Now you have the first solution, decrease the bgp timers. You have to check
b*p
23 楼
from your prev post, you have ONE router facing SP network. If the BFD
detects other side is down and notify the BGP, this bgp will withdraw all
prefix and re-advertise the ones from backup SP. I am not sure if this is
what you are asking.
Above it is the fast failure detection between your network and SP.
Fulcrum's idea IP FRR is to fast-reroute your internal networks, if one node
/link is down on the path, the router can switch to pre-calculated path
during the IGP working on the new path. But i am very green on this.
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: Hi buyup,
: 再次感谢你的回复。我下午网上查了点资料,关于你说的BFD, 现在有几个问题还请你
: 帮忙解释一下:
: 一旦我们启用了bfd以后,比如我设置那个bfd liveness detection 是一秒,那么一旦
: 我本地路由器没有收到回复,是不是路由起马上就把当前bgp session 给kill, 转到另
: 外一个bgp 线上了? 这个过程是怎么运作的?在网上没有看到说的很清楚的。。
: 你提到两个方法,第一种是10秒级的,就是修改timer,我感觉这个不是很适合我们的
: video service. 估计这个bfd 可能更适合我们的需求。
: 另外,又看到大家提出,ip FRR: 如果我们使用bfd,我们是否仍然需要这个呢?我们
: 的所有设备都是juniper 的,我看了,juniper 好像有个类似的协议:Host fast
detects other side is down and notify the BGP, this bgp will withdraw all
prefix and re-advertise the ones from backup SP. I am not sure if this is
what you are asking.
Above it is the fast failure detection between your network and SP.
Fulcrum's idea IP FRR is to fast-reroute your internal networks, if one node
/link is down on the path, the router can switch to pre-calculated path
during the IGP working on the new path. But i am very green on this.
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: Hi buyup,
: 再次感谢你的回复。我下午网上查了点资料,关于你说的BFD, 现在有几个问题还请你
: 帮忙解释一下:
: 一旦我们启用了bfd以后,比如我设置那个bfd liveness detection 是一秒,那么一旦
: 我本地路由器没有收到回复,是不是路由起马上就把当前bgp session 给kill, 转到另
: 外一个bgp 线上了? 这个过程是怎么运作的?在网上没有看到说的很清楚的。。
: 你提到两个方法,第一种是10秒级的,就是修改timer,我感觉这个不是很适合我们的
: video service. 估计这个bfd 可能更适合我们的需求。
: 另外,又看到大家提出,ip FRR: 如果我们使用bfd,我们是否仍然需要这个呢?我们
: 的所有设备都是juniper 的,我看了,juniper 好像有个类似的协议:Host fast
c*i
24 楼
IP FRR是based on IGP,对你这个case没啥用。你和isp之间是direct connect ebgp还
是有别的?另外一个可以考虑的是用IP SLA来track,不知道可行不。
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: Hi buyup,
: 再次感谢你的回复。我下午网上查了点资料,关于你说的BFD, 现在有几个问题还请你
: 帮忙解释一下:
: 一旦我们启用了bfd以后,比如我设置那个bfd liveness detection 是一秒,那么一旦
: 我本地路由器没有收到回复,是不是路由起马上就把当前bgp session 给kill, 转到另
: 外一个bgp 线上了? 这个过程是怎么运作的?在网上没有看到说的很清楚的。。
: 你提到两个方法,第一种是10秒级的,就是修改timer,我感觉这个不是很适合我们的
: video service. 估计这个bfd 可能更适合我们的需求。
: 另外,又看到大家提出,ip FRR: 如果我们使用bfd,我们是否仍然需要这个呢?我们
: 的所有设备都是juniper 的,我看了,juniper 好像有个类似的协议:Host fast
是有别的?另外一个可以考虑的是用IP SLA来track,不知道可行不。
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: Hi buyup,
: 再次感谢你的回复。我下午网上查了点资料,关于你说的BFD, 现在有几个问题还请你
: 帮忙解释一下:
: 一旦我们启用了bfd以后,比如我设置那个bfd liveness detection 是一秒,那么一旦
: 我本地路由器没有收到回复,是不是路由起马上就把当前bgp session 给kill, 转到另
: 外一个bgp 线上了? 这个过程是怎么运作的?在网上没有看到说的很清楚的。。
: 你提到两个方法,第一种是10秒级的,就是修改timer,我感觉这个不是很适合我们的
: video service. 估计这个bfd 可能更适合我们的需求。
: 另外,又看到大家提出,ip FRR: 如果我们使用bfd,我们是否仍然需要这个呢?我们
: 的所有设备都是juniper 的,我看了,juniper 好像有个类似的协议:Host fast
L*t
25 楼
As LZ mentioned 2 BGP sessions, I suppose it's multihoming.
BFD is definitely the way to go. Once link failure detected, LZ's router
will start to reroute through 2nd link per routes already available.
Unless LZ's router is doing transit, no route to withdraw from backup SP.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
node
【在 b***p 的大作中提到】
: from your prev post, you have ONE router facing SP network. If the BFD
: detects other side is down and notify the BGP, this bgp will withdraw all
: prefix and re-advertise the ones from backup SP. I am not sure if this is
: what you are asking.
: Above it is the fast failure detection between your network and SP.
: Fulcrum's idea IP FRR is to fast-reroute your internal networks, if one node
: /link is down on the path, the router can switch to pre-calculated path
: during the IGP working on the new path. But i am very green on this.
BFD is definitely the way to go. Once link failure detected, LZ's router
will start to reroute through 2nd link per routes already available.
Unless LZ's router is doing transit, no route to withdraw from backup SP.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
node
【在 b***p 的大作中提到】
: from your prev post, you have ONE router facing SP network. If the BFD
: detects other side is down and notify the BGP, this bgp will withdraw all
: prefix and re-advertise the ones from backup SP. I am not sure if this is
: what you are asking.
: Above it is the fast failure detection between your network and SP.
: Fulcrum's idea IP FRR is to fast-reroute your internal networks, if one node
: /link is down on the path, the router can switch to pre-calculated path
: during the IGP working on the new path. But i am very green on this.
u*e
26 楼
先感谢大家的热心回复。我简单的 说一下我的网络结构吧。
(router1)-------(router2)
每个router都连有两个isp,都做了bgp, 两个router之间我还配置了ibgp. 所有的
bgp都接受全网路由。 这样做的目的就是为了在其中一根线断了之后,数据流可以尽快
的切换到其他线上去(不管是去自己路由器的另外一根线,或者是另外一台路由器。不
过我估计他会优先选择本机的另外一根线把。。。。)。
现在基本可以确定,bfd会是我的一个必要选择。但是请问,基于我现在的结构,ip
frr,有需要吗?
【在 L******t 的大作中提到】
: As LZ mentioned 2 BGP sessions, I suppose it's multihoming.
: BFD is definitely the way to go. Once link failure detected, LZ's router
: will start to reroute through 2nd link per routes already available.
: Unless LZ's router is doing transit, no route to withdraw from backup SP.
: Correct me if I'm wrong.
:
: node
(router1)-------(router2)
每个router都连有两个isp,都做了bgp, 两个router之间我还配置了ibgp. 所有的
bgp都接受全网路由。 这样做的目的就是为了在其中一根线断了之后,数据流可以尽快
的切换到其他线上去(不管是去自己路由器的另外一根线,或者是另外一台路由器。不
过我估计他会优先选择本机的另外一根线把。。。。)。
现在基本可以确定,bfd会是我的一个必要选择。但是请问,基于我现在的结构,ip
frr,有需要吗?
【在 L******t 的大作中提到】
: As LZ mentioned 2 BGP sessions, I suppose it's multihoming.
: BFD is definitely the way to go. Once link failure detected, LZ's router
: will start to reroute through 2nd link per routes already available.
: Unless LZ's router is doing transit, no route to withdraw from backup SP.
: Correct me if I'm wrong.
:
: node
b*p
27 楼
I know what you mean. I thought LZ has other iBGP peers(R2) with the dual-
homing edge router(R1), in this case the router(R1) should withdraw/re-
advertise the prefixes from backup to iBGP peer(R2).
If LZ only has 1 BGP rtr as the edge, then no re-advertise, just best-select
the backup prefixes.
【在 L******t 的大作中提到】
: As LZ mentioned 2 BGP sessions, I suppose it's multihoming.
: BFD is definitely the way to go. Once link failure detected, LZ's router
: will start to reroute through 2nd link per routes already available.
: Unless LZ's router is doing transit, no route to withdraw from backup SP.
: Correct me if I'm wrong.
:
: node
homing edge router(R1), in this case the router(R1) should withdraw/re-
advertise the prefixes from backup to iBGP peer(R2).
If LZ only has 1 BGP rtr as the edge, then no re-advertise, just best-select
the backup prefixes.
【在 L******t 的大作中提到】
: As LZ mentioned 2 BGP sessions, I suppose it's multihoming.
: BFD is definitely the way to go. Once link failure detected, LZ's router
: will start to reroute through 2nd link per routes already available.
: Unless LZ's router is doing transit, no route to withdraw from backup SP.
: Correct me if I'm wrong.
:
: node
b*p
28 楼
From a quick google, IP FRR is to target 50-ms level traffic convergence. If
I was you, I will leave it to 2nd phase after some experiment and tests,
because your bfd consideration is 1-sec level convergence. you can try some
tech to tune your IGP to have a fast convergence at seconds level.
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 先感谢大家的热心回复。我简单的 说一下我的网络结构吧。
: (router1)-------(router2)
: 每个router都连有两个isp,都做了bgp, 两个router之间我还配置了ibgp. 所有的
: bgp都接受全网路由。 这样做的目的就是为了在其中一根线断了之后,数据流可以尽快
: 的切换到其他线上去(不管是去自己路由器的另外一根线,或者是另外一台路由器。不
: 过我估计他会优先选择本机的另外一根线把。。。。)。
: 现在基本可以确定,bfd会是我的一个必要选择。但是请问,基于我现在的结构,ip
: frr,有需要吗?
I was you, I will leave it to 2nd phase after some experiment and tests,
because your bfd consideration is 1-sec level convergence. you can try some
tech to tune your IGP to have a fast convergence at seconds level.
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 先感谢大家的热心回复。我简单的 说一下我的网络结构吧。
: (router1)-------(router2)
: 每个router都连有两个isp,都做了bgp, 两个router之间我还配置了ibgp. 所有的
: bgp都接受全网路由。 这样做的目的就是为了在其中一根线断了之后,数据流可以尽快
: 的切换到其他线上去(不管是去自己路由器的另外一根线,或者是另外一台路由器。不
: 过我估计他会优先选择本机的另外一根线把。。。。)。
: 现在基本可以确定,bfd会是我的一个必要选择。但是请问,基于我现在的结构,ip
: frr,有需要吗?
L*t
29 楼
Make sense.
A followup question. Do MX or ASR routers support clustering, like VSS for
Cat6k switch? If so, no need to run any IGP between the two routers.
select
【在 b***p 的大作中提到】
: I know what you mean. I thought LZ has other iBGP peers(R2) with the dual-
: homing edge router(R1), in this case the router(R1) should withdraw/re-
: advertise the prefixes from backup to iBGP peer(R2).
: If LZ only has 1 BGP rtr as the edge, then no re-advertise, just best-select
: the backup prefixes.
A followup question. Do MX or ASR routers support clustering, like VSS for
Cat6k switch? If so, no need to run any IGP between the two routers.
select
【在 b***p 的大作中提到】
: I know what you mean. I thought LZ has other iBGP peers(R2) with the dual-
: homing edge router(R1), in this case the router(R1) should withdraw/re-
: advertise the prefixes from backup to iBGP peer(R2).
: If LZ only has 1 BGP rtr as the edge, then no re-advertise, just best-select
: the backup prefixes.
u*e
32 楼
最近都在讨论这个BFD如何切换的问题。我还想到一个问题:假设BFD成功的发现链路
failure,然后BGP也成功切换了。那么当原来那根线路恢复了,现有bgp table 和
routing table会发现什么变化? (这个有点类似于vrrp的一个问题,当原来的
primary node 恢复了以后,会不会发生抢占的问题。。。)
谢谢
failure,然后BGP也成功切换了。那么当原来那根线路恢复了,现有bgp table 和
routing table会发现什么变化? (这个有点类似于vrrp的一个问题,当原来的
primary node 恢复了以后,会不会发生抢占的问题。。。)
谢谢
s*g
33 楼
That will be taken care of by BGP protocol itself.
ISPs are very conservative in terms of BGP configuration, for them stability
is more important than flexibility or customer preferences (for example,
Level3 does not even want to turn on ORF capability), your best bet of
faster fail over is to shorten BGP hold timer if you are peering with
loopbacks (if you are peering with physical interface IP, BGP fast external
failover functionality will automatically kick in without waiting for hold
timer to expire)
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 最近都在讨论这个BFD如何切换的问题。我还想到一个问题:假设BFD成功的发现链路
: failure,然后BGP也成功切换了。那么当原来那根线路恢复了,现有bgp table 和
: routing table会发现什么变化? (这个有点类似于vrrp的一个问题,当原来的
: primary node 恢复了以后,会不会发生抢占的问题。。。)
: 谢谢
ISPs are very conservative in terms of BGP configuration, for them stability
is more important than flexibility or customer preferences (for example,
Level3 does not even want to turn on ORF capability), your best bet of
faster fail over is to shorten BGP hold timer if you are peering with
loopbacks (if you are peering with physical interface IP, BGP fast external
failover functionality will automatically kick in without waiting for hold
timer to expire)
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 最近都在讨论这个BFD如何切换的问题。我还想到一个问题:假设BFD成功的发现链路
: failure,然后BGP也成功切换了。那么当原来那根线路恢复了,现有bgp table 和
: routing table会发现什么变化? (这个有点类似于vrrp的一个问题,当原来的
: primary node 恢复了以后,会不会发生抢占的问题。。。)
: 谢谢
u*e
36 楼
那么请问,那些对 time 非常敏感的视频,在线通信等service 公司是如何做到
milisecond level 切换的呢?
stability
external
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】
: That will be taken care of by BGP protocol itself.
: ISPs are very conservative in terms of BGP configuration, for them stability
: is more important than flexibility or customer preferences (for example,
: Level3 does not even want to turn on ORF capability), your best bet of
: faster fail over is to shorten BGP hold timer if you are peering with
: loopbacks (if you are peering with physical interface IP, BGP fast external
: failover functionality will automatically kick in without waiting for hold
: timer to expire)
milisecond level 切换的呢?
stability
external
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】
: That will be taken care of by BGP protocol itself.
: ISPs are very conservative in terms of BGP configuration, for them stability
: is more important than flexibility or customer preferences (for example,
: Level3 does not even want to turn on ORF capability), your best bet of
: faster fail over is to shorten BGP hold timer if you are peering with
: loopbacks (if you are peering with physical interface IP, BGP fast external
: failover functionality will automatically kick in without waiting for hold
: timer to expire)
s*g
37 楼
Like what upstairs said, if you are a small customer, ISPs won't bird you,
but if you are a big customer, they will so whatever you want them to do. I
am not sure you can achieve milli-second ISP fail-over, most BFD
implementations only support longer than 10-ms hellos, so typically longer
than 30
milli-second fail detection. IP/MPLS FRR is for a totally different
fail scenario.
Did you check with your ISP? they might be able to accommodate, you first
need to check with your ISP's account person who sold you this service.
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 那么请问,那些对 time 非常敏感的视频,在线通信等service 公司是如何做到
: milisecond level 切换的呢?
:
:
: stability
: external
but if you are a big customer, they will so whatever you want them to do. I
am not sure you can achieve milli-second ISP fail-over, most BFD
implementations only support longer than 10-ms hellos, so typically longer
than 30
milli-second fail detection. IP/MPLS FRR is for a totally different
fail scenario.
Did you check with your ISP? they might be able to accommodate, you first
need to check with your ISP's account person who sold you this service.
【在 u*****e 的大作中提到】
: 那么请问,那些对 time 非常敏感的视频,在线通信等service 公司是如何做到
: milisecond level 切换的呢?
:
:
: stability
: external
m*k
38 楼
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】
: Like what upstairs said, if you are a small customer, ISPs won't bird you,
: but if you are a big customer, they will so whatever you want them to do. I
: am not sure you can achieve milli-second ISP fail-over, most BFD
: implementations only support longer than 10-ms hellos, so typically longer
: than 30
: milli-second fail detection. IP/MPLS FRR is for a totally different
: fail scenario.
: Did you check with your ISP? they might be able to accommodate, you first
: need to check with your ISP's account person who sold you this service.
相关阅读
南湾 N. San Jose公司招 Accountant Contractor石涛TV 《石涛.Radio 》 七一江泽民完全被封杀 习近平摧毁常委夺党权会计工作选择求建议ACL 软件Balance Sheet Flux求南卡地区referral会计的微信群现在还可以发机经吗?BEC北湾,马琳郡事务所,税务为主,招人 (Marin County)买了17版贝壳教科书分享PDF版求建议-大妈转Accounting可行吗?打听下,有绿卡进四大会不会容易点?寻四大会计师事务所合伙人相关的管理制度四大新鲜面经,希望offer快快来征两成员团购cpa review and final reviewStaff accountant和 Financial analyst 哪个更有前途有关GLASSDOOR上的公司REVIEW求购AUD的Final Review2016 AICPA BECKER review +Final review 团购请问保税专员