[50808] in North American Network Operators' Group
endpoint liveness (RE: Do ATM-based Exchange Points make sense an
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lane Patterson)
Fri Aug 9 18:22:29 2002
From: Lane Patterson <lpatterson@equinix.com>
To: "'Petri Helenius'" <pete@he.iki.fi>,
Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, nanog@merit.edu
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:22:00 -0700
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
BGP keepalive/hold timers are configurable even down to granularity=20
of link or PVC level keepalives, but for session stability reasons,=20
it appears that most ISPs at GigE exchanges choose not to
tweak them down from the defaults. IIRC, Juniper is 30/90 and Cisco is
60/180. My gut feel was that even something like 10/30 would be=20
reasonable, but nobody seems compelled that this is much of an
issue.
Cheers,
-Lane
-----Original Message-----
From: Petri Helenius [mailto:pete@he.iki.fi]
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 3:07 PM
To: Mikael Abrahamsson; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Do ATM-based Exchange Points make sense anymore?
> What functionality does PVC give you that the ethernet VLAN does not?
>
That=B4s quite easy. Endpoint liveness. A IPv4 host on a VLAN has no =
idea
if the guy on the "other end" died until the BGP timer expires.
FR has LMI, ATM has OAM. (and ILMI)
Pete
