Hugo, I've used this configuration in a past line when I may of had multiple L2 steps between L3 devices. The only concern we had was around load BFD put on _some_ endpoint routers, if was handles on the RouteProcessor vs on line cards. -jim On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Hugo Slabbert <hugo@slabnet.com> wrote:
Good morning, nanog,
Is there any/sufficient benefit in adding BFD onto BGP sessions between directly-connected routers? If we have intermediate L2 devices such that we can't reliably detect link failures BFD can help us quickly detect peers going away even when link remains up, but what about sessions with:
- eBGP with peering to interface addresses (not loopback) - no multi-hop - direct back-to-back connections (no intermediate devices except patch panels)
Possible failure scenarios where I could see this helping would be fat fingering (filters implemented on one or the other side drops traffic from the peer) or e.g. something catastrophic that causes the control plane to go away without any last gasp to the peer.
Or is adding BFD into the mix in this type of setup getting into increasing effort/complexity (an additional protocol) for dimishing returns?
-- Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: hugo@slabnet.com pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal