Niall, I'll answer clarifying questions, but hope to remain mostly silent while people offer their opinions.
On Apr 19, 2018, at 3:46 PM, Niall Donaghy <niall.dona...@geant.org<mailto:niall.dona...@geant.org>> wrote: Jeff> Thus, a knob is being considered to have both the "only on-the-wire" impact or the "whenever the route's properties change" impact. Can I suggest a knob with three options – the two you mention, plus an option to maintain /both/ timers? If that’s not feasible (for reasons you already eluded), so be it. My preference is indeed for ‘best of both’. I don't believe we'll be adding a second timer at this time. We have proposals in mind that may permit variable sizing of some of our core data structures. Once we have such a thing, we may consider such optional memory-hungry features. I know I want to do several things with them. :-) Jeff> The question being: What's the default? As you indicated, quite a few folk on older hardware will be sensitive to resource impacts. I suggest the default should be on-the-wire as this incurs the minimal CPU hit, as I understand it. Please consider the extra CPU hit to be marginal. It's the memory hit that's the main concern for having more than one timer. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
