[39150] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Time to revise RFC 1771
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Barney Wolff)
Wed Jun 27 01:02:52 2001
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 01:02:20 -0400
From: Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20010627010220.A23921@tp.databus.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20010627043210.22446.cpmta@c004.sfo.cp.net>; from sean@donelan.com on Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 09:32:10PM -0700
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
I must be missing something. I thought the first duty of a routing
protocol was to avoid loops, even above maintaining reachability.
Are we really sure that accepting all but the noticeably bad routes
from a berserk neighbor would not cause loops?
Also, if we damp bgp routes, surely we should damp bgp sessions too?
There's no need to retry instantly.
Barney Wolff
