Swati,

Its not that we are not advertizing the route, as in BGP damping. We are
advertizing bad news immediately and good news not as immediately. We are
only not breaking the adjacency immediately. So we dont have to go thru the
process of forming adjacencies.

As I said its an implementation issue, best solved closer to hardware. And I
guess no drafts for it, as of now.

Thanks,
Vishwas

-----Original Message-----
From: Swati Rastogi [mailto:swatirstogiYAHOO.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:49 AM
To: OSPFDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Subject: Re: Route Flapping

Hi Manral,
The solution which you gave is quite similar to what is followed in BGP. You
monitor the link (in that case its the NLRI), declare it as down, and if you
find that its stable for quite some time now, its only then , that you
advertise it or in this case bring up the adjacency. Now my question is that
,is there any draft which talks of this.
Secondly, if a link is flapping in BGP then it will damp all the NLRIs
associated with that link .. which is what i meant by BGP dampening the link
:-)

Regards,
Swati
----- Original Message -----
From: "Manral, Vishwas" <VishwasMNETPLANE.COM>
To: <OSPFDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: Route Flapping

> Hi Russ/Jason/Swati,
>
> Well MinLSInterval does serve the purpose of LSA's being originated,
however
> it does not solve the purpose of the adjacency going down. The solution
for
> this could be to not break adjacency immediately, although updating the
> router LSA, so that the link is shown down, so the news is propagated
> immediately. Also Bad news shld be immediately advertized, unlike good
news.
>
> As Russ said its an implementation issue, and its best if this is dealt
> closer to the hardware level. As we can have a lot of protocols actually
> affected by this. Also BGP damps particular NLRI, it does not damp link
> flaps.
>
> Thanks,
> Vishwas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Chen [mailto:jasonFORCE10NETWORKS.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:00 AM
> To: OSPFDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
> Subject: Re: Route Flapping
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I think MinLSInterval will serve the same purpose.
>
> Thanks,
> Jason
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russ White [mailto:ruwhiteCISCO.COM]
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 9:14 PM
> To: OSPFDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
> Subject: Re: Route Flapping
>
>
> Nope... I would consider this implementation specific, mostly,
> since it should be the router which is seeing its connected link
> flap which does these dampening.
>
> :-)
>
> Russ
>
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, Swati Rastogi wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > Is there any mechanism to supress instable routes in OSPF by dampening
the
> > advertisement of such routes. This mechanism exists in BGP .. is it
there
> > for OSPF also ?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Swati

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]