At 08:53 PM 7/11/96 -0500, Alan Hannan wrote:
Vadim,
] 2) Don't Do Any Dynamic Routing Where Only One Path Exists.
Certainly I would not agree with this rule.
If I have a tail router that is down, I do not want to send traffic to him, when he is not there to receive it. Rather, I would want my intermediate router to reject it right off. Furthermore, I do not want to extend nondynamic notification in my network.
Alan, 'Tis better to black-hole packets than to flap. - paul
......... Paul Ferguson is rumored to have said: ] ] At 08:53 PM 7/11/96 -0500, Alan Hannan wrote: ] ] > Vadim, ] > ] >] 2) Don't Do Any Dynamic Routing Where Only One Path Exists. ] > ] > Certainly I would not agree with this rule. ] > ] > If I have a tail router that is down, I do not want to send ] > traffic to him, when he is not there to receive it. Rather, I ] > would want my intermediate router to reject it right off. ] > Furthermore, I do not want to extend nondynamic notification in my ] > network. ] ] Alan, ] ] 'Tis better to black-hole packets than to flap. Ahhhhh.... but I'd prefer to flap than have to track down evil legacy statics.... Dealing w/ flapping is much more intellectually stimulating :) I did neglect to mention that fascist null0 static-ing at my egress points helps to decrease the ramifications of any flapping. -alan
Jerry Anderson (jerry@gi.net) writes:
3. Better TCP windowing and better performance when all packets follow the same path.
When I wrote that I was thinking of multiple paths, rather than asymmetric paths. Compare the TCP performance of packet-based load balancing to session-based load-balancing. Vadim Antonov (avg@ncube.com) writes:
2) Don't Do Any Dynamic Routing Where Only One Path Exists.
Alan Hannan (alan@gi.net) writes:
Certainly I would not agree with this rule.
Nor would I. It might make sense in a flat topology, but ours is more hierarchical. I find network management easier when we push the details of tail-circuit connections out to the access router. The less complications in hub and core routers, the better. Paul Ferguson (pferguso@cisco.com) writes:
'Tis better to black-hole packets than to flap.
In core (EGP) routing, absolutely. However, I haven't noticed any ill effects of flapping in our internal network. -- Jerry Anderson jerry@gi.net Principal Engineer (402) 436-3030 Implementation & Consulting http://www.gi.net/jerry Global Internet Network Services (formerly known as MIDnet)
participants (3)
-
Alan Hannan -
Jerry Anderson -
Paul Ferguson